Page 1
When Charlie Kirk died last Wednesday, I saw people having complete meltdowns, and felt it was my job to be the voice of reason. This came across as crass at the time, as people were really full of emotion. If you were one of the emotional ones, and you go back now and read those articles today, I am certain you will have a different opinion of what I was doing there.
Yes, it was crass, but the crassness was a response to the emotionalism I was seeing everywhere I looked. What I was trying to do, hoping to do without much hope it would work, is ground people by pointing out that this might be emotional for you, but all that means is that the government is going to use this to push an agenda on you.
Here’s some of what I wrote the day after Charlie died (you can skip this, I hate quoting myself, but I need to make this point):
What I have seen, however, is that people are having a really, really serious emotional reaction to Charlie Kirk getting assassinated. Like, I read Twitter, and people are having emotional breakdowns, freaking out, calling for some kind of Super Patriot Act.
…
Right now, the Trump administration is building up this internal army in the form of ICE, and much worse, he is making these deals with Palantir. There were various social media accounts calling for Palantir to be “unleashed” on illegal immigrants. Now it’s calls for the entire power of the federal government, including our militarized law enforcement and Palantir, to be “unleashed” on “the left.”
How did that work out when the full force of the state was unleashed on “international terrorism”? Did that work out good for you? Did it work out good for the country?
To all of you having this emotional reaction: I admit, I do not understand what you’re going through. It seems to be very difficult. I don’t understand or respect that, but I can accept that it is what it is. But please. Relax. And think about what it is you are calling for. Look at this massive movement of all of these social media accounts demanding the federal government be unleashed on the public. Does it feel maybe a bit artificial? I mean, even if you’re feeling it, are you able to see how maybe there is something a bit nefarious going on here?
Can we think maybe just one step ahead here, and consider maybe what the consequences of giving intelligence agencies, paramilitary law enforcement, and private military contractors the ability to “hunt down domestic terrorists” might turn out perhaps not so good? Maybe it could in fact be like, the worst possible thing imaginable?
…
Anyway. Whatever. I guess I hope you enjoy your experience with these dark forces you are calling upon. And after all, who knows? Maybe the US federal government are the good guys this time and they’re really going to help you stop trannies or Islamofascism or whatever? Could be. Could be.
Screenshot this I guess so you can come back and mock me after giving over massive new powers to the government results in a great outcome, where your stupid woman emotions are satisfied after Israel and Peter Thiel build you a utopia where no one ever gets shot with a gun again.
And then:
The narrative from the right is daunting, with Trump in his video paying tribute to Kirk using the opportunity to call for some kind of unspecified crackdown, which we can only assume means even more egregious restrictions on speech and more military and militarized cops everywhere. There is a huge astroturf campaign to do the exact same thing the left did to the right when they claimed that “speech causes violence,” and therefore “speech is violence,” and therefore free speech shouldn’t exist.
Then, of course, as I’d said, on Tuesday, Pam Bondi, the perplexing Attorney General, came out with an announcement that we now have new hate speech laws in America, which she is going to enforce against anyone who is saying… whatever it is they might be saying.