I think there were really two different Charlie Kirks. Depending on where you saw him, you could have a completely different impression of him.
Whether he was racist or not, he said really bad things. One of his last tweets said, “Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.” That’s a vile lie that contributed to the current political climate that many are now denouncing (when the other side does it).
That sort of thing seems inconsistent with his Christian message, but it’s all too common from self-proclaimed Christians. The word “hypocrisy” comes to mind.
I don't think that Charlie Kirk was racist. Rather, he was a brilliant salesman who sold racism-tinged content (among many other kinds of content) to an audience who was hungry for that kind of thing. Had the Trump project fizzled out in 2016 and a more Romney-ite GOP was what remained, he would be peddling the Romney party line and producing whatever content the GOP in that alternative universe was hungry for. Kirk always struck me as one of the savviest trolls on the Right, not a true believer like Nick Fuentes or Stephen Miller. He's hardly alone on the Right (and Left) in playing to an audience that would make him rich and influential.
Did he deserve to die? Absolutely not. From a cynical perspective, like Andrew Breitbart, odds are pretty good that he'll become even more influential as a martyr, much in the same way that Breitbart didn't become a household name until Andrew was gone. From a moral perspective, Tyler Robinson had no right to murder Kirk and leave a widow and two fatherless children for whatever selfish reason Robinson believed justified his actions. Whatever cause Robinson thought he was fighting for in this case will likely be severely damaged for his actions.
"Ensuring a diverse candidate slate for roles involves creating a rigorous process to qualify candidates (based on education, experience, capability) while also ensuring we're not only selecting from the same place over and over (e.g., the same university that the company CEO likes or someone's personal network which is typically made up of quite similar people) - a slate of diverse and highly qualified candidates makes for an excellent job search."
Part of this comes down to not understanding what DEI is at root - meritocracy. There has been misapplication of DEI and bad processes created in *some* orgs, but misapplication does not mean that you then eliminate it - you correct the misapplication.
Instead what we're getting from those opposed to DEI/meritocracy is "If you're Black/brown you're inherently a DEI hire, no matter how qualified you may actually be". This is just racist BS from a bunch of losers incapable of dealing with actual competition.
I also think focusing on racism as inherently institutional is kinda bogus: racists exists whether they are in power or not. It's what they do when they get power - institutionalize their racism - that is all the more reason to keep shaming them and keep them from power.
It's about truth and the rights constant desire to twist it. They are trying to get people fired for simply quoting him now. The president commanded flags at half mast. I don't know about you all but I don't like seeing another lost cause myth start right before my eyes.
Oh and he might have started out not really racist but I am a firm believer you can't keep saying racist things without starting to believe your own words.
Since it seems it constantly needs to be be said, no he did not deserve to die. Yes his killing was dreadful and tragic.
I’m glad you took this one instead of me!
I think there were really two different Charlie Kirks. Depending on where you saw him, you could have a completely different impression of him.
Whether he was racist or not, he said really bad things. One of his last tweets said, “Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.” That’s a vile lie that contributed to the current political climate that many are now denouncing (when the other side does it).
That sort of thing seems inconsistent with his Christian message, but it’s all too common from self-proclaimed Christians. The word “hypocrisy” comes to mind.
https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1965281328108343507?s=61&t=X6XxCDIBmdrPHrSiKT5oaQ
I don't think that Charlie Kirk was racist. Rather, he was a brilliant salesman who sold racism-tinged content (among many other kinds of content) to an audience who was hungry for that kind of thing. Had the Trump project fizzled out in 2016 and a more Romney-ite GOP was what remained, he would be peddling the Romney party line and producing whatever content the GOP in that alternative universe was hungry for. Kirk always struck me as one of the savviest trolls on the Right, not a true believer like Nick Fuentes or Stephen Miller. He's hardly alone on the Right (and Left) in playing to an audience that would make him rich and influential.
Did he deserve to die? Absolutely not. From a cynical perspective, like Andrew Breitbart, odds are pretty good that he'll become even more influential as a martyr, much in the same way that Breitbart didn't become a household name until Andrew was gone. From a moral perspective, Tyler Robinson had no right to murder Kirk and leave a widow and two fatherless children for whatever selfish reason Robinson believed justified his actions. Whatever cause Robinson thought he was fighting for in this case will likely be severely damaged for his actions.
We live in the stupidest timeline.
"Ensuring a diverse candidate slate for roles involves creating a rigorous process to qualify candidates (based on education, experience, capability) while also ensuring we're not only selecting from the same place over and over (e.g., the same university that the company CEO likes or someone's personal network which is typically made up of quite similar people) - a slate of diverse and highly qualified candidates makes for an excellent job search."
Part of this comes down to not understanding what DEI is at root - meritocracy. There has been misapplication of DEI and bad processes created in *some* orgs, but misapplication does not mean that you then eliminate it - you correct the misapplication.
Instead what we're getting from those opposed to DEI/meritocracy is "If you're Black/brown you're inherently a DEI hire, no matter how qualified you may actually be". This is just racist BS from a bunch of losers incapable of dealing with actual competition.
I also think focusing on racism as inherently institutional is kinda bogus: racists exists whether they are in power or not. It's what they do when they get power - institutionalize their racism - that is all the more reason to keep shaming them and keep them from power.
It's about truth and the rights constant desire to twist it. They are trying to get people fired for simply quoting him now. The president commanded flags at half mast. I don't know about you all but I don't like seeing another lost cause myth start right before my eyes.
Oh and he might have started out not really racist but I am a firm believer you can't keep saying racist things without starting to believe your own words.
Since it seems it constantly needs to be be said, no he did not deserve to die. Yes his killing was dreadful and tragic.
So yes it is important who Charlie Kirk was.
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."