Canadian parliament gives standing ovation to honor Charlie Kirk.
-
Misleading title. Yes, Charlie Kirk’s assassination sparked a conversation about the importance of free speech and disavowing political violence. The standing ovation was not for Charlie, but for the outcome of that speech.
Still, you’d think they’d at least TRY to be reasonable with the optics of the conversation.
But isn’t what Kirk did constitute as hate speech here in Canada. We don’t have freedom of speech, we have freedom of expression.
He didn’t deserve to die but he was toxic in every sense of the word.
-
My queer, female co-worker was mourning him and binge watching his content recently. I mentioned i was surprised she would listen to him given his views and she basically rebuttaled “uhm actually he does respect women, see he interviewed some porn stars and only fans girls.”
She’s a special kinda stupid.
-
She’s a special kinda stupid.
She’s welcome to listen to what she wants, i was just surprised the respect she had for him given he wants a world where she wouldn’t have rights.
-
She’s welcome to listen to what she wants, i was just surprised the respect she had for him given he wants a world where she wouldn’t have rights.
Wouldn’t have rights because she’s a woman? Or queer?
Both.
-
I hope somebody is keeping a list of all these people because it’s straight up a list of fascists.
-
can we stop applauding nazis in parliment for gods sake.
-
Propaganda works, y’all. It’s serious.
-
Why the fuck is our supposedly liberal government giving standard ovations to conservative pundits? What do they hope to accomplish by pushing this rhetoric? Right wingers will never see this and think “wow maybe I’ll vote liberal next election” you fucking idiots. I hate everything.
NO!!!
Kirk wasn’t a ‘conservative pundit,’ he was a bigot, a homophobe, a white supremacist, a sexist piece of shit who cheered on the deaths of others.
Make it clear: he was a source of hatred and violence.
-
Yup. Exactly. And ndp is just in the corner shitting the bed
Still…
-
Canadian politicians have never heard of this thing called “optics” before. It’s a very isolated and fart-sniffing group of people
-
That’s right. If they had not mentioned him or mentioned a few examples, him among them, that would have made the optics very different.
Problem with that though is their intention was specifically him. You’re removing their motive from this by saying they could have not talked about him. Their motive was him. Honoring him. Lionizing him. Making a
murdermartyr of him. You can’t take away the motive. -
NO!!!
Kirk wasn’t a ‘conservative pundit,’ he was a bigot, a homophobe, a white supremacist, a sexist piece of shit who cheered on the deaths of others.
Make it clear: he was a source of hatred and violence.
Potato potato.
-
Yup. Exactly. And ndp is just in the corner shitting the bed
Maybe if all the “strategic voters” had even a little bit of a spine. “I prefer the NDP but I need to vote NDP! Hey, why does the NDP not get any support?!”
How many Canadians flatly refuse to vote for what they believe while being mad that the government isn’t reading their minds? We aggressively signal that we do not want the NDP and then get mad that they aren’t the thing we keep showing them that we do not want. Get a clue.
-
Maybe if all the “strategic voters” had even a little bit of a spine. “I prefer the NDP but I need to vote NDP! Hey, why does the NDP not get any support?!”
How many Canadians flatly refuse to vote for what they believe while being mad that the government isn’t reading their minds? We aggressively signal that we do not want the NDP and then get mad that they aren’t the thing we keep showing them that we do not want. Get a clue.
If this is such a systemic problem that it alters elections, the problem is with the system.
The individuals are doing a risk/benefit assessment at a micro level. It is more damaging for them to have a conservative government than it is for them to have a liberal government and that may weigh more to them than the incredibly slim possibility of having an ndp government.
You cant penalize people for picking what is in their best interest. And they can still be pissed off that the best choice they had still led to a shitty outcome.
If you want something different, the system needs to change.
-
Problem with that though is their intention was specifically him. You’re removing their motive from this by saying they could have not talked about him. Their motive was him. Honoring him. Lionizing him. Making a
murdermartyr of him. You can’t take away the motive.I think someone already made a murder of him. Maybe the word you meant was martyr?
-
Sharing a post from Skeletor
-
If this is such a systemic problem that it alters elections, the problem is with the system.
The individuals are doing a risk/benefit assessment at a micro level. It is more damaging for them to have a conservative government than it is for them to have a liberal government and that may weigh more to them than the incredibly slim possibility of having an ndp government.
You cant penalize people for picking what is in their best interest. And they can still be pissed off that the best choice they had still led to a shitty outcome.
If you want something different, the system needs to change.
100% that we need reform, something the Liberals will not give us.
At some point though we have to admit that our system is less one rigged for a specific party at it’s core and more one that benefits the most established party at the time. If we all voted for a different party they would ultimately win. A huge reason why people say they won’t vote NDP is because they claim that the party “doesn’t have a chance”. If they wanted that party to win_before_ voting for them then we deserve everything we get because as a population we’re too fucking stupid for any other outcome.
Also all strategic voting does here is ratchet everything to the right and raises the stake for the following election. We decided to let it go for a while and now all we really have is the center-right and far-right. Congrats to every spineless coward who got us here and screamed loud and clear that what they want to see more of is pathetic corporate centrism.
-
Misleading title. Yes, Charlie Kirk’s assassination sparked a conversation about the importance of free speech and disavowing political violence. The standing ovation was not for Charlie, but for the outcome of that speech.
Still, you’d think they’d at least TRY to be reasonable with the optics of the conversation.
They don’t seem interested in optics given their other clown behaviour of inviting PJ2025 galaxy brains to speak behind closrd doors.
Canada didn’t cancel on them from backlash. The garbage people they invited did.
-
100% that we need reform, something the Liberals will not give us.
At some point though we have to admit that our system is less one rigged for a specific party at it’s core and more one that benefits the most established party at the time. If we all voted for a different party they would ultimately win. A huge reason why people say they won’t vote NDP is because they claim that the party “doesn’t have a chance”. If they wanted that party to win_before_ voting for them then we deserve everything we get because as a population we’re too fucking stupid for any other outcome.
Also all strategic voting does here is ratchet everything to the right and raises the stake for the following election. We decided to let it go for a while and now all we really have is the center-right and far-right. Congrats to every spineless coward who got us here and screamed loud and clear that what they want to see more of is pathetic corporate centrism.
Again, they aren’t spineless cowards when their choices are “evil” and “pretty shitty.” They are voting for what is best for them.
You can say that they have other choices, but as individuals, they really do not. Any other vote is essentially a vote for “evil”
Look what happened down south. You think those people who voted for Jill Stein are happy that trump got in?
-
What the fuck is that
