domain:sotonye.substack.com
I’m sorry but none of this strikes me as serious or meaningful except the fact that he specifically mentioned disliking Charlie Kirk to his family, which is in harmony with my thesis anyway.
Let me clarify what I mean by he doesn’t seem political: he doesn’t seem to have ever gone to any sort of political rally or activist event for any party, he hasn’t made any sort of public statements on social media accounts about this or that politician, etc. His voter registration is explicitly “No Party.” And perhaps most importantly, he didn’t leave a manifesto to tell us why he did what he did. Even Luigi half-assed a few paragraphs for us. Uncle Ted wrote us a proper epistle. I’m genuinely not trying to cover up for some pet left-wing beliefs of mine or something. I don’t live in Burgerstan, I honestly don’t care that much about your dumpster fire either way. I’m saying I think the shooter was basically non-political because I actually believe he was basically non-political. You’re free to disagree.
I simply do not see any evidence that he cared about politics at all beyond this one act. Which is why my analysis is what it is in my original post.
EDIT: for what it’s worth, the Dramatards have found evidence he was on LoveForLandlords (a popular rdrama psyop back in the day), which is an explicitly satirical subreddit of left-wing causes (mocking the working class and mocking LGBT)
Skeletor
7hr ago
Isn’t it just memes from a video game?
No, as pointed out here.
https://www.themotte.org/post/3128/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/365897?context=8#context
Soteriologian
7hr ago
That’s not really what I meant. I mean his responses to content placed in front of him are much more intelligent and coherent than what you’d see from, say, Joe Rogan or Tucker Carlson or Candace Owens. He never falls for the egregious plebe stuff like “wow, could Ivermectin really help with cancer?” or “Is Macron’s wife a transsexual? 😱”
I realize this sounds like a painfully low bar but… I mean, that is in fact where the bar is. News commentators in visual media really are functionally retarded by our standards. All intelligent discourse takes place through textual media.
Soteriologian
8hr ago
Fuentes has nowhere near the scope of name recognition and credentials that Kirk did
Kirk is a college dropout. I’m not sure what you mean here.
Obviously Kirk has broader reach, but it has nothing to do with Kirk’s superiority; he has reach for the same reason Miley Cyrus did: he’s backed by big money. Fuentes is not backed by any mainstream organization. In fact, quite the opposite: they’ve gone to great lengths to outright suppress him, and have still failed.
You don't have a good theory of mind for the current generation of left-wingers, who aren't the theory-reading pedants of the last century, but more often than not are driven by an impulsive and anti-intellectual tendency to essentialise their entire political opposition into one monolithic force of evil.
I mean, this guy had a Harvard-tier ACT score. He shouldn’t be completely retarded. Then again, he performed a high-profile assassination while chatting with his friends on Discord, so maybe +2 SD doesn’t even render one out of the “meat comes from the supermarket”-tier zone for Zoomers. Honestly, if this is the case, you’re correct, I really have no theory of mind for people that retarded, and my psychoanalysis is better reduced to “guess it was a chimp-out, skibidi.” I mean come on, how does someone not know to not take their cell phone with them on this little excursion? Snowden was 10 years ago, and even without that, you’d still have cell blocks and SIM tracking.
Why don't you address the less low-hanging fruit of my reply to your original statement, i.e. the obvious political content inscribed on the bullet casings?
Isn’t it just memes from a video game? I mean, yes, technically Helldivers 2 does have political content, but given the level of cognitive ability we’re dealing with here, I’m not going to do some Elden Ring-tier deep-dive into the game’s themes and symbolism to figure out what the shooter was trying to say. He’s just saying stupid zoomer nonsense.
oats_son
8hr ago
For buying a gun from a federal firearms licensed dealer, right? Just drive to the nearest red state and make a friend. Or, hell, 3D print one yourself. We're talking about murder here, so a federal gun crime is small potatoes, and it's easy to do with so many guns in the country. But this is a pretty narrow point, because that's two states out of fifty.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
8hr ago
Otherwise, you could just buy it on the private market in another state.
It is federally illegal to buy a firearm in another state if you do not meet the legal requirements in your own state.
I live in NJ; I cannot lawfully purchase a similar rifle anywhere in the country, because NJs firearms owners permit is too hard to get. You need to tell them the name and hospital affiliation of any mental health practitioner you have ever seen, since birth, and you need to have two unrelated adult references swear you're moral enough to buy a gun.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
8hr ago
Touche.
magicalkittycat
8hr ago
If they turn the internal organs of Ben Shapiro, Joe Rogan, JK Rowling, and Matt Walsh's organs all into mucilage, it would still be a very low rate of political violence on paper.
Sure, when violent leftist groups go around doing a bunch of murder instead a single attack by a brainrotted young man, I'll acknowledge that it's an issue. But right now we have the latter, not the former, so you're arguing a made up scenario and getting scared by your imagination.
oats_son
8hr ago
So what? I live in Illinois. You need a FOID card to buy any gun, sure, but it's easy to get besides the wait time. Otherwise, you could just buy it on the private market in another state. And both this murderer and Luigi Mangione are the types to not have a rap sheet, so a FOID card is easy.
oats_son
8hr ago
If they turn the internal organs of Ben Shapiro, Joe Rogan, JK Rowling, and Matt Walsh's organs all into mucilage, it would still be a very low rate of political violence on paper. It turns out that you only need a very small handful of people willing to kill for the cause to have a massively outsized influence on the entire landscape of the country. The more celebrating I see, the more likely that is to happen. Tens of thousands wishing for the death of just a small handful of people is a very concentrated amount of violence. You should fear the reaction very, very much.
StJohnOfPatmos
8hr ago
He is by far the most intelligent and most original thinker.
Name one single original idea that was developed by Nick Fuentes - I'm extremely curious. Every time I see an extrait of his streams, he's just ranting in a vaguely comedic tone about jews.
StJohnOfPatmos
8hr ago
It is a mystery, because Fuentes is the obvious, obvious target if you're actually concerned about The Rise of Far Right Fascism.
Fuentes has nowhere near the scope of name recognition and credentials that Kirk did, and your refined analysis bears no relation to how a self-radicalized leftist distinguishes between a MAGA think tank guy and an actual Fascist, which is to say, not at all. You don't have a good theory of mind for the current generation of left-wingers, who aren't the theory-reading pedants of the last century, but more often than not are driven by an impulsive and anti-intellectual tendency to essentialise their entire political opposition into one monolithic force of evil. Kirk was literally speaking to a crowd of thousands - Fuentes sits alone in his room streaming. To someone who thinks virtually everyone even in proximity of Trump is just another tentacle of the Fascist Kraken, Kirk obviously is the more attractive target. (Besides the basic fact that Kirk's career and output is exponentially more public-facing than Fuentes', which makes his assassination an event one can plan and premeditate).
How people here are so illiterate as to read this as "ARE YOU ENDORSING LE CHARGLIE KURK MURDER?" is beyond me.
Why are you accusing me of lowering the bar and level of quality around here if you're just going to then engage in completely absurd straw-manning? I said nothing of the sort, so why are you including it in your answer to my comment? Why don't you address the less low-hanging fruit of my reply to your original statement, i.e. the obvious political content inscribed on the bullet casings? Don't you see how transparent this cherry-picked and histrionic reaction is to everyone reading it?
I really don't think you're in any position to look down on others engaging with your arguments politely and offering fair rebuttals, even if some are less strong than others. Your tone and defensiveness is clearly coming from an emotional place and takes us away from getting anywhere in this discussion, which is a loss.
crushedoranges
Can Marx explain the used panties market?
8hr ago
It brings to mind the nuns murdered and raped in the Paris Commune, in the Russian Revolution, in Republican Spain. If you bring that up to a leftist today, they will twist themselves into knots into trying to justify it. Yes, even the feminists. Some pithy statement on how they were part of Christofascism or something.
Nuns.
I think it is clear that there is no level of innocence that a Communard agitator will not justify as tainted and full of sin. It doesn't matter if he wasn't a saint. There is no bottom to the depravity of which these people can find. There are many on reddit and bluesky and in real life who are fundamentally illiberal and want others dead for having ideas they dislike. That's a plain fact.
I really think that Conservative v. Neutral indirectly but adequately explains why this is not a cut-and-dried issue. People readily get caught up in the minutiae ("why did you include J6 but exclude the Floyd riots? why do you count white gang violence but not black gang violence? what do you mean, 'trans is not an ideology?'"). But in many people's (especially, academic researchers') minds, violence motivated by right wing thoughts or policies is ideologically driven, while violence motivated by left wing thoughts or policies gets parsed as neutral. Combine that with the historical emphasis on combating Nazi-style authoritarianism, and we (Americans) just live in a world where right wing political violence is more legible than its counterpart.
Plus, we live in a liberal nation; even Trump is basically a lib. American society is racially integrated, and as a matter of law we often actively oppress efforts to argue or demonstrate that this is working out poorly for us. The leftist position is the "neutral" position; there is no ideological violence available to them to strengthen their position. We live in a secular society, and more than that, as a matter of law we actively oppress efforts to argue or demonstrate that this is working out poorly for us. We live in a nation that requires and enforces gender egalitarianism, prosecutes numerous historically attested heterosexual norms while protecting and even privileging what was once illegal sexual deviance, and imposes exorbitant taxes to fund dubious redistribution schemes. The leftist position in all these cases is treated as the "neutral" position; there is no ideological violence available to them to strengthen their position!
There are still some things leftists get violent about (capitalism, for example) but it is sometimes suggested that political violence is first and foremost the practice of people who feel so excluded from the national conversation that violence is all that remains to them. If more political violence does come from the right, then presumably they are the ones most often being excluded from the national conversation. But by the same token, when people do lash out violently in ways that say, "we do not feel our voice is being adequately heard," we should recognize that is ideological violence. People who think a given act of ideological violence is warranted, often persuade themselves that it is, therefore, not ideological. But that's just wrong.
In short, low political violence depends on a significant degree of ideological homogeneity--or highly functional values pluralism--or totalitarian repression of heterodox ideas. Asking "which side does more violence" is not a meaningless inquiry, but it tells us less about the virtues or vices of any particular ideology, and more about how well our nation presently treats its various outcasts.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
8hr ago
What do you think happens when these societal losers see what they can become with a $400 bolt action rifle that you can buy in any ban state?
You still need a permit to buy it in New Jersey and I think Illinois.
Throwaway05
8hr ago
The media pushing this kind of analysis mostly misses the point. You could easily point out differences in base rates, gross issues with misreporting, whatever.
The fundamental problem is that most modern right wing violence is an accident of ideology committed by a fringe with little support. Condemnations are widespread, the people engaging it have been mostly grossly mentally ill, no leading figures are calling for it, no mainstream institutions are calling for it or supporting it (at least up until current events).
In contrast modern left wing violence is demanded and supported by mainstream institutions both directly and by implication. Histrionic rhetoric like "they are going to put us in camps" "literally Hitler" and so on are mainstream positions that are asserted publicly (including at work in some places) that demand and rationalize violent action. Sometimes it's even more direct than that "bash the fash" for instance.
It's a miracle that we haven't had more of it, although that time is likely ended now - and we've already quite a lot, much of which was violence at protest actions is unlikely to be adequately captured in the data.
Usually the response of the left to this sort of criticism is "well X fringe red tribe figure said Y" or "well Trump's rhetoric is divisive because blah blah."
No, no that is not the same as what the left is saying - it's mainstream, blunt, pervasive in multiple domains and in blue tribe milieus almost completely unopposed.
I appreciate the effort to do a data driven approach but it is pointless, and buys into the left's frame, totally missing the heart of the issue and would be required to find solutions.
ulyssessword
9hr ago
Yup. It doesn't take much to clear up that you're talking about the last two sentences he said, instead of simply eliding the last one.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
9hr ago
I’m not trying to do a gotcha. I’m pointing out that a specific claim you made was wildly overblown. I’m not trying to be insightful or even attack the edifice of your post in any holistic way. I’m literally just focused on that specific claim, which I think was inaccurate.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
9hr ago
Working class because my income mostly comes from labor and not investments.
Am I doing this right?
Soteriologian
9hr ago
I said it directly adjacent to the Scott reference on depression in Africa. Come on man, stop conflating pedantry for insight. I don't care about gotchas; I care about understanding stuff.
If you want a zingers and gotchas, there's... well, Charlie Kirk's TikToks.
Hereditarily upper middle, although not truly in the fifth or whatever generation continental European way (a little less common in the Anglosphere, where the haute bourgeoisie has a more fluid cultural and economic relationship with the more mobile upper middle class).
My father grew up small town upper-middle class and my mother something slightly above (or maybe just more urban than) that, although both families had a lot of rises and falls. On my father’s side a big industrial fortune was lost in the Great Depression; his own grandfather was a husk the rest of his life, a New Jersey accountant and business manager for other people when he had been groomed to be a Manhattan titan of industry, always struggling with money and in debt. There are no famous rabbis or scholars in my lineage, so on the Ashkenazi bloodline hierarchy we’re pretty mediocre, a mix of Latvian, Ukrainian and German-Swiss Jewry maybe.
My parents went from NYC upper middle class to wealthy when I was in high school, which was interesting, and I think I’ve written about that before. In England all professional Americans without specific signifiers (very strong Southern yee-haw accent, for example) are grouped into the same social class status, which is about as good as it gets as a foreigner other than the special privilege afforded to Kiwis and Aussies. Your accent, politics and culture will get made fun of, but you are considered competent, professional, relatively intelligent and are a viable dinner guest or party invite most of the time.
Brendan Tarrant killed more people, actively posted his stream on 8chan and yet 8chan is still around, though they did a rebrand/rehost. These things just pop right back up again. Relax.
People are overhyping the assassination I think. Consider https://xkcd.com/1979/ about the assassination of President Garfield and the section of the newspaper it's in. Permanent history of the world? Immortally preserved? Few even remember who he was and he was a sitting president! The great emotion of that time is forgotten, despite its greater significance.
I get where you're coming from, but there is no way to turn down the temperature. The brainwormed extremist 5% on each side have control of the thermostat and are only interested in turning it up. The moderate left and right want the other side's extremists to stop raising the temperature, but they are unwilling to police their own extremists (or if they are, they are denounced as traitors and are sidelined). Neither side is willing to unilaterally disarm for fear of what the other side will do to them (though to be fair, I think the right is more justified in this fear based on the last 10 years). So the temperature will ratchet up until some event releases all the pressure.
More options
Context Copy link