How would I know it’s Mexico if it’s not yellow?

Calling out people for making stuff up is not sea lioning

I disagree, the Republicans ARE a cabal of idiots. The people who own them and run the party in the shadows, however, are not.

I take issue with your question because it conflates two completely separate things as the same. There’s a very difference between a “system” and an “individual”, especially when that person is a private citizen. Ideally, political violence should be a line that’s never crossed, however, we don’t live in an ideal world. If people are tired of the system they live under, and they have no meaningful way of getting change then violence might be inevitable. However, in these cases people go after the system itself. That means the actual institutions that keep the system in place. Want an example? Look at what’s happening right now in Nepal.

What you don’t do to fight a system is shoot a private citizen over their political views. That’s not meaningful resistance, that’s just violence. It doesn’t do anything or change anything, all it does is help establish a dangerous precedent where violence becomes an acceptable part of political discourse. Don’t like someone’s political views? Shoot them, they probably deserved it anyway… at least that’s what people here are saying to justify it, but what these don’t understand is that it’s a two way street. Just as you cheer and condone political violence, others can as well, including the people you don’t like. You can’t condemn people you don’t like for doing it but then cheer for the same actions when the people you like do it, because you’ll just be a hypocrite and your words will hold no weight. It’s not a defensible position.

It should be noted that for any principle to mean anything, it is absolutely mandatory for it to be applied fairly and universally. If we want to remain a society that values civil liberties, then those have to extend to everyone, including those who you don’t like don’t or don’t agree with, and this includes people with vile views. When a system becomes a dysfunctional mess, it means that it has deviated significantly from it’s founding principles, and a new system needs to take it’s place to embody them. However, if the people no longer believe in civil liberties for all, then we’re looking at a very grim future because we would have tyranny’s pandora’s box.

So you can’t cite a specific example? Nobody is disagreeing that Kirk had vile views, but you made a very specific claim that I want verification for. Give me something, anything that directly shows Kirk actually did this:

He was promoting actual, race-targeted violence domestically and internationally

No it isn’t. You being not caring is perfectly fine, but the OC was wasn’t being apathetic to the situation, they were embracing it.

Can cite specific examples of this?

It’s not about him, it’s about the implications of embracing actions like this. Vigilantes killing people for political reasons without due process is not justice

See the issue with this mentality is that THIS is the mentality of authoritarians. You try to find ways to justify the murder of the people you politically disagree with while not applying the same standard to the people you politically agree with.

What you’re doing is helping set a precedent that political violence is justified if you frame it in a certain way. If that’s the case then other extremist whackos, including conservative ones, are going to start doing the same thing. What’s there from stopping some conservative nutjob from shooting someone like Hasan Piker or AOC or Mamdani or anyone on the left really as a retaliation? After all, if what you’re saying here is now passing as a valid justification, then they’ll just use your very own justification to justify their own actions.

The things that authoritarians don’t understand is that when principles aren’t applied universally, the standard becomes subjective, and sooner or later, their abuse of power will come back to bite them in the ass by the very standard they helped establish. I am fully aware that Lemmy is usually off the deep end on politics, but this is too unhinged even for this platform.

This is some tin foil hat shit solely because Trump is too stupid to do any elaborate planning like this

Number 4 is reasonable if people are educated on what Marxism is in theory and practice

I like how every generation has the same issue just rebranded:

Should inter tribal marriage be a thing?

Should be people from different classes be able to marry?

Should people from different religious sects be able to marry?

Should people from different religions be able to marry?

Should interracial marriage be a thing?

Should people of the same sex be able to marry?

And soon, we’re about to have

Should people be able to marry robots?