The “Epstein thing” is never going to have reprecussions
It’s hard to tell, but it has disillusioned at least some of his supporters, showing that it is possible, at least for some people, to snap out of the cult. Obviously some will always support him, no matter what.
it will take a lot of time and significant financial investment for someone else to fill that role.
I don’t think it will hurt them in any significant way, maybe even the opposite. Kirk is still incredibly useful as a martyr figure and it’s not like he had much of an operational role. He was a propagandist and he will still be used to spread far right propaganda, even in his death.
I understand that he was incredibly influencial, but that’s mostly because he was a pioneer of the modern right who made the right wing cool to a younger audience, but his methods have since been adapted by many other right wing propagandists.
Or can you explain why you think his assasination will weaken or harm the right? Because I don’t see it.
it has disillusioned at least some of his supporters
Has it? You added a lot of weasel words to that claim there. If so what evidence specifically disillusioned them? Again from my perspective I hear a lot of “this will surely be the end of him” and then that predicted “end” never comes. My understanding is that disconnect comes from an inaccurate belief that there is equality under law, equality in reporting, etc.
Kirk is still incredibly useful as a martyr figure
Probably, but if martyr figures were that powerful then wouldn’t it be useful for ‘the left’ to also start martyring themselves? Martyrs can only ever do passive propoganda, Charlie was doing active propoganda and ultimately I don’t think Martyrs tend to be all that useful.
why you think his assasination will weaken or harm the right
one less active propagandist
power vacuum and loss of leadership within turning point
chilling effect on this sort of rhetoric
impulsive and poorly planned ‘retaliations’ causing further damage
The point is that Trumps image can change, even for his core supporters… I obviously have no clue exactly how many of his supporters were dissilusioned, which is why I will use “weasel words” (aka estimates and guesses)…
I hear a lot of “this will surely be the end of him”
I doubt that there will ever be the “one thing” where everyone suddenly realises they have been duked… Obviously that’s not how it works…
if martyr figures were that powerful
Ever heard of George Floyd? Trayvon Martin? Eric Garner? Those people weren’t even influencial to the left wing as a movement when they were alive (unlike Kirk), yet they still fueled one of the biggest movements in recent years.
start martyring themselves?
Some people do that, but in order to be powerful, they have to have been killed by the enemy you want to mobilize people against… Which is why the right will do whatever they can to blame this on “the radical left”, no matter what.
I don’t think Martyrs tend to be all that useful.
I think you are incredibly wrong on this point.
one less active propagandist
Pretty insignificant considering the countless other right wing propagandists out there who do pretty much the same thing. Also, events like this have a tendency to inspire more propagandists and radicalize people.
power vacuum and loss of leadership within turning point
Possible, but again, tp is not THAT important. They have turned a significant part of the youth and have a likeminded regime in power that continues to concolidate power. And they can an will use this event to consolidate more.
chilling effect on this sort of rhetoric
That’s not gonna happen…
impulsive and poorly planned ‘retaliations’ causing further damage
Damage to whom? You don’t know because the potential results are unpredictable.
I obviously have no clue exactly how many of his supporters were dissilusioned, which is why I will use “weasel words” (aka estimates and guesses)
If I had responded to your last question with this sort of “I have no clue, it’s just a guess” you would have, rightfully, called bullshit.
It might be naïvely optimistic of me but I refuse to believe that you have come to your beliefs purely based on ‘vibes’. Help me see what you see because I don’t see it.
If I’m wrong and you have extremely confident beliefs based entirely on “estimates and guesses” that is a serious fucking problem means you are, by definition, divorced from reality.
I doubt that there will ever be the “one thing”
Other than the Epstein files? :P
Seriously though, I wasn’t asking for “one thing” I was asking for being specific and providing an example of something that does so that we can establish where the goalpost and what is/isn’t effective.
Also 3 names from half a decade ago compared to the ~5500 deaths in the interim gives a “martyr success rate” of ~0.05%. I have a hard time believing Charlie will statistically be in the “successful martyr” group even if being a “influential” person is a 100x multiplier and even with such a pathetically low bar of “success”
Pretty insignificant considering the countless other right wing propagandists
It seems like you are falling for the same fallacy of there being “one singular influencer which will end it all”… Obviously that’s not how it works…
is not THAT important ___ continues to concolidate power.
You do see how that leads to them being “THAT important”? In my opinion any roadblock to those efforts and that desired outcome is a good thing.
Let’s try a different approach. Can you expand on why you think this will make left-wing organizing less effective/more difficult/etc.?
It’s hard to tell, but it has disillusioned at least some of his supporters, showing that it is possible, at least for some people, to snap out of the cult. Obviously some will always support him, no matter what.
I don’t think it will hurt them in any significant way, maybe even the opposite. Kirk is still incredibly useful as a martyr figure and it’s not like he had much of an operational role. He was a propagandist and he will still be used to spread far right propaganda, even in his death.
I understand that he was incredibly influencial, but that’s mostly because he was a pioneer of the modern right who made the right wing cool to a younger audience, but his methods have since been adapted by many other right wing propagandists.
Or can you explain why you think his assasination will weaken or harm the right? Because I don’t see it.
Has it? You added a lot of weasel words to that claim there. If so what evidence specifically disillusioned them? Again from my perspective I hear a lot of “this will surely be the end of him” and then that predicted “end” never comes. My understanding is that disconnect comes from an inaccurate belief that there is equality under law, equality in reporting, etc.
Probably, but if martyr figures were that powerful then wouldn’t it be useful for ‘the left’ to also start martyring themselves? Martyrs can only ever do passive propoganda, Charlie was doing active propoganda and ultimately I don’t think Martyrs tend to be all that useful.
Yep.
The point is that Trumps image can change, even for his core supporters… I obviously have no clue exactly how many of his supporters were dissilusioned, which is why I will use “weasel words” (aka estimates and guesses)…
I doubt that there will ever be the “one thing” where everyone suddenly realises they have been duked… Obviously that’s not how it works…
Ever heard of George Floyd? Trayvon Martin? Eric Garner? Those people weren’t even influencial to the left wing as a movement when they were alive (unlike Kirk), yet they still fueled one of the biggest movements in recent years.
Some people do that, but in order to be powerful, they have to have been killed by the enemy you want to mobilize people against… Which is why the right will do whatever they can to blame this on “the radical left”, no matter what.
I think you are incredibly wrong on this point.
Pretty insignificant considering the countless other right wing propagandists out there who do pretty much the same thing. Also, events like this have a tendency to inspire more propagandists and radicalize people.
Possible, but again, tp is not THAT important. They have turned a significant part of the youth and have a likeminded regime in power that continues to concolidate power. And they can an will use this event to consolidate more.
That’s not gonna happen…
Damage to whom? You don’t know because the potential results are unpredictable.
Like Trump’s failed assassinations?
By what metrics?
If I had responded to your last question with this sort of “I have no clue, it’s just a guess” you would have, rightfully, called bullshit.
It might be naïvely optimistic of me but I refuse to believe that you have come to your beliefs purely based on ‘vibes’. Help me see what you see because I don’t see it.
If I’m wrong and you have extremely confident beliefs based entirely on “estimates and guesses” that is a serious fucking problem means you are, by definition, divorced from reality.
Other than the Epstein files? :P
Seriously though, I wasn’t asking for “one thing” I was asking for being specific and providing an example of something that does so that we can establish where the goalpost and what is/isn’t effective.
Yep and the problem has gotten worse since then. IE not an effective solution to the problem.
Also 3 names from half a decade ago compared to the ~5500 deaths in the interim gives a “martyr success rate” of ~0.05%. I have a hard time believing Charlie will statistically be in the “successful martyr” group even if being a “influential” person is a 100x multiplier and even with such a pathetically low bar of “success”
It seems like you are falling for the same fallacy of there being “one singular influencer which will end it all”… Obviously that’s not how it works…
You do see how that leads to them being “THAT important”? In my opinion any roadblock to those efforts and that desired outcome is a good thing.
Let’s try a different approach. Can you expand on why you think this will make left-wing organizing less effective/more difficult/etc.?