After Kirk shooting, Utah governor calls social media a “cancer.” Will we treat it like one?

We did not evolve to handle this, Utah governor says.

See full article...

 

[Deleted member 1085004]

Here's the problem: It doesn't take long to look at other countries and identify the same undercurrents threatening them.

The realization that freedom of speech isn't compatible with the existence of the inevitable end result of traditional conservatism by design is also a century and two (possibly three) World Wars overdue, and that latter realization is why the political middle has failed, or will fail, not only to govern but to campaign. It's quickly drowned out because it's filtered out the killer instinct needed to resist it's extremes.

I think Karl Popper summed up today's age in the paradox of tolerance long ago:

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

That's the issue with both sides 'enlightened centrism' take when the position is literally 'people have this attribute shouldn't exist by the authority of God/America/whatever.' If someone wants to burn your house down with you in it because they don't like something about you they could easily ignore if they were more mature, what's the middle ground - burn your house down and live on the street?

 

[beestrofowler]

Like cutting funding for its research?

 

[Zeppos]

I'm ok with that. It will also stop this kind of leftist hate: View attachment 117937

Indeed! Let both sides quench in the boring momentum of the plain and normal. So much drama...

 

[Mentil]

Given the recent Arsticle on how social media is probably irredeemable, it'd likely take some drastic measures to fix. As in, forbidding advertising and affiliate marketing on websites that claim Section 230 immunity (or better yet, in all nonfiction media). Ending engagement-maximization and grift would probably eliminate 99% of the issues.

Of course, there'd still be some sites like 4chan that have toxicity issues despite lack of profit motive.

 

[D.Becker]

The evidence seems moderately clear as of time of writing that he was actually a left wing type, a classmate called him a very “Reddit” kind of person, and he was active in Antifa discord servers.

Are you talking about Kirk's shooter?

The ones promoting that he was a "left wing type" seem to be making it up.

For instance there was a Guardian article which cited an anonymous friend of Tyler X claiming he was the only "leftist" in his family? It was withdrawn, with an editor's note, after the "verified source that attended high school with Tyler.. said they could not accurately remember details of their relationship".

Or to put it more clearly, the source made it up to put the blame on 'the left'.

There does seem to be lots of evidence that he was 'extremely online', both on right-wing forums and as a troll elsewhere.

 

[cfenton]

The middle ground is to ignore them until they commit a crime or such is obviously and materially imminent, same as the standard has always been. Now, in terms of social shame? Have at it. In terms of pressuring their livelihood or other non-governmental bit material impacts? It’s a tough rope to walk. Best we can do is muddle through it a bit. But, employ some charity, and realize that punishment is sometimes counterproductive.

Like, occasionally racists do mend their ways. But not because they get shamed out of it! It’s almost always because of a mix of people pushing back in smaller ways building up over time, and also personal experience. Nothing kills racism more than regular interaction with a counter-example! I realize that some people feel this is a burden, to feel the need to be a model minority or a socially acceptable gay person or what have you. Yes. It is a burden. But that doesn’t make the potential benefit of being a good example any less. Don’t shy away from this. Be a better father, better mother, better sibling, better friend, and moderation often follows. It’s a game of aggregation in some respects though. But that’s how minds change, it’s very rarely instant, so it’s crazy to me that some people seem to think that it’s still possible somehow. That’s just magical thinking, not enlightened leftism, and not effective rightism either.

That's just a long way of asking minorities to act like straight white people.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

That's just a long way of asking minorities to act like straight white people.

While also demanding they expose themselves to bigots who want to harm them.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

I'm ok with that. It will also stop this kind of leftist hate: View attachment 117937

I’m going to paraphrase a post from Bluesky:

Are you a right-wing podcaster? Are you scared right now? Scared that what happened to Kirk might happen to you? A bullet out of nowhere?

Good.

Welcome to a tiny taste of what you’ve inflicted on others. Now you know how it feels to be one of the groups you’ve demonised.

May you have not a moment’s rest. Because that’s what you inflicted on others.

 

[RZetopan]

Charlie Kirk, the misogynistic racist*, says: "read scripture"

Sure thing, here are a few choice selections to read from:

Exodus 22:18:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," When I pointed this out to one fundamentalist, he claimed that he didn't know what a witch was (an obvious lie for him) but insisted that "they must be killed!", (his emphasis.)

1 Peter 2:18:
"Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh." The bible's pro-slavery attitude was very much recognized in the Southern states, and they continually used it to justify their obsession. Many conservatives still support slavery, even at least one black one (Mark Robinson).

Deuteronomy 25:11–12:
"If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity." Enough said.

Deuteronomy 22:20–21:
"If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death."
All non-virginal women who marry need to be killed.

Leviticus 20:9:
"For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death"
Kill your own son, if he gets mad and curses you.

Hosea 13:4, 9, 16:
"Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up"
Kill all the children and pregnant women of your enemies.

Luke 16:18"
"Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.”
Divorce is a crime. And note that only the husband can divorce the wife, the reverse was never allowed.

2 Kings 2:23-24:
"He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” 24 And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys." So the god of Israel sends two bears to kill 42 little children for making fun of a bald prophet.

Deuteronomy 21:18-21:
"If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.' Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death."
Rebellious sons should be killed by stoning.

Matthew 10:34-36"
"“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household." Jesus, the "prince of peace".

Luke 22:36:
"He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.'" Jesus, the "prince of peace", again.

Matthew 21:18-22: and a different version in Mark 11:12-14:
"The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, 'May no one ever eat fruit from you again.' And his disciples heard him say it." Jesus gets angry that a fig tree is not bearing fruit out of season so he kills the tree.

There are many more of these, and the religious apologetics industry exists only to try to explain away the unjust and quite primitive bible verses. But magic still does not work.

*https://progressives.substack.com/p/charlie-kirk-was-a-racist-misogynist
*https://delawareblack.com/charlie-kirk-on-race-key-statements-and-controversies/

 

[EnragedEwok]

Even before social media, it wasn't too difficult for absolutely awful people with disgusting views (even for their time!) to be able to reach a wide-ranging audience through newspapers, then radio, then television, and even get actual political power in government. Our country has always had this side to it, despite the egalitarian principles the nation was founded on. And to be clear, the US isn't the only country with this issue, I'm just speaking with respect to the US. It's easy to blame social media, but that's just a cop out.

 

[RZetopan]

Edit: Normally I ignore down votes on my own comments, but who the hell downvotes a factual statement that bullying on social media has led to multiple suicides?

Ammosexuals.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ammosexual

 

[ewelch]

That's rich, him talking about evolution. That governor is such a scumball.

 

[ewelch]

Maybe not the news outlets you watch. I see dozens of posts about his better messages every day. But then again, you read the headline of this article and came here and still haven't realized that news medias are designed to divide us. Good job, you're the target demographic.

Maybe not the news outlets you watch. I see dozens of posts about his better messages every day. But then again, you read the headline of this article and came here and still haven't realized that news medias are designed to divide us. Good job, you're the target demographic.

So, stoning gay people is a positive message. It most certainly is a common one amongst Christian Nationalists.

 

[RZetopan]

He also said he spent the past 33 hours 'praying' that the shooter was from out of state, out of the country, that it wasn't "one of us"... Cox can fuck all the way off

Nothing fails as bad a prayer.

 

[scrimbul]

False. Both are tyranny in different shapes.

You are willfully ignoring that you have no answer to the Paradox of Tolerance.

Frankly, that's been your homework you've been ignoring for a few years now, coming to the final conclusion justifying your stance against that paradox.

The political middle has accomplished a lot in good governance prior to Trump coming to power each time, but it's not a messaging issue that they have failed, it's the absolute refusal to acknowledge they had/have the power to force a level debate playing field and excise conservatism from the economy.

If you don't break their will and spirit, they will continue to use sophistry and victimhood to dance around the issue, and violence outside of self-defense against them supercharges it, I absolutely acknowledge it, but the logical conclusion to the Paradox of Tolerance demands a boot to the neck of Stephen Miller and solitary confinement if he doesn't recant, but not death outside of the inevitable desperate and angry lashing out against said economic exclusion for trying to re-open settled debates (which you yourself already conceded the point you're trying to make about tyrannizing conservatives by acknowledging this very fact)

You, and the entire political middle, lost before even opening your mouths on the concept of blind bipartisanship and 'rejecting tyranny in all its forms' against the Paradox of Tolerance right out the gate. That's why the political middle is failing, not its governing or economic incompetence or its corruption.

 

[ewelch]

Maybe not the news outlets you watch. I see dozens of posts about his better messages every day. But then again, you read the headline of this article and came here and still haven't realized that news medias are designed to divide us. Good job, you're the target demographic.

Maybe not the news outlets you watch. I see dozens of posts about his better messages every day. But then again, you read the headline of this article and came here and still haven't realized that news medias are designed to divide us. Good job, you're the target demographic.

Having been a member of the news media for more than 40 years (retired), I can definitively state you are not only mistaken, you clearly have sought out media that you will find you can agree with. There are plenty of news media who have normalized the kind of things people on the far right and far left have pretended are points of debate, and worthy of consideration. There's plenty of money being spent in the news media to prop up their profits. But considering at least 80 percent of news media is owned by conservatives, your claim on the basic facts is false.

 

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I don't think it's the lesson I'm intended to be learning; but the volume of fretting about a school shooting with one target and no collateral damage vs. the bog standard flavor really drives home how little these people actually care about the latter type.

The double standard is especially blatant when the victim is on the record as considering homicides to be acceptable costs of the 2nd amendment.

 

[RZetopan]

View attachment 117898

And we have a narcissistic, psychopathic ketamine and hallucinogenic drug addict* adding to that: "The fundamental weakness of Western Civilization is empathy" -- Elon Musk

*Forgot to add: Nazi.

 

[omonarca]

As things are, the governor is not wrong. Social media needs to be rethought and redone for things to improve. But that may require looking at capitalism as the ideology that drives all thoughts and research in the western world and change that like we split the Church from the State. We have understood having God in politics to be a bad thing. It may be time to do the same with capital.

 

[th_in_gs]

Grab a gun and shoot up a school, or now I guess assassinate someone famous, and you’re on your way to infamy

Assassinating someone really famous demonstrably works - but shoot up a school? Not really - not any more - we’re too inured to it to notice who does it any more.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

Assassinating someone really famous demonstrably works - but shoot up a school? Not really - not any more - we’re too inured to it to notice who does it any more.

"Nobody shoots up a school anymore. It's too common!" - Yogi Berra, probably.

 

[RZetopan]

Charlie Kirk was a fake christian. He never went to church apart from promotional self-aggrandizing events, and pretty much abused Christianity as a crude cudgel to gain clout for himself at the expense of millions Jesus would have welcomed with open arms.

You may want to examine the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. There are over 45,000 Christian sects, and they can't even agree among themselves what a "True Christian" is. Lutherans have told me that Catholics are not "True Christians" Catholics have told me that Mormons are not "True Christians", Pentecostalists tell me that they are the only "True Christian" church, etc. Further examination results in their accusations becoming circular. There are many "Christians" who identify with, and are indistinguishable from, Charlie Kirk in their strongly held beliefs. And, remember that religionists overwhelmingly supported getting Felon45 back into the White House.

White Evangelical Protestant: 81%
Hispanic Protestant: 63% (even after all his Hispanic attacks!)
White Catholic: 60%
White non-Evangelical Protestant: 57%
All the remaining ones are under 50%, but none are anywhere near zero.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
https://religionnews.com/2025/06/26...-with-catholics-nonwhite-protestants-in-2024/
https://www.arizonachristian.edu/20...istoric-victory-post-election-research-shows/
https://prri.org/spotlight/religion-and-the-2024-presidential-election/
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-r...s-in-other-us-religious-groups-prefer-harris/

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." Seneca (5 BCE - 65 CE)

 

[prh99]

Now right wingers are trying to threaten people into respecting Kirk, who let's be honest was not a good person in word or deed, with harassment and attempts to get people fired, and for all their complaining about cancel culture. More it's okay when we do it.

 

[FluffyFreak]

There was a school shooting the same day as this waste of skin got shot, no-one seems to care.
There's been hundreds of them over the years and nothing has been done, but you shoot one of these right wing arseholes and suddenly "something must be done"

 

[crepuscularbrolly]

There was a school shooting the same day as this waste of skin got shot, no-one seems to care.
There's been hundreds of them over the years and nothing has been done, but you shoot one of these right wing arseholes and suddenly "something must be done"

We all know that "something" is to round up the "leftists" and, you know…

 

[Mental Gear Reduction]

We all know that "something" is to round up the "leftists" and, you know…

That's what the massive ICE buildup is for. They wouldn't need to spend all those billions to round up just immigrants.

They're trying to get us used to seeing people grabbed off the streets. Just exactly who is getting grabbed is kind of an irrelevant detail.

 

[arsisloam]

I just want to point out, Kirk was killed by a groyper. Yes, those 4chan right wing troll losers. Rival gangs of right wing douches are killing each other.

Groypers are currently busting up Kirk memorials, because they're such unbelievable douches. It has nothing at all to do with "the left."

 

[ilidd]

I just want to point out, Kirk was killed by a groyper. Yes, those 4chan right wing troll losers. Rival gangs of right wing douches are killing each other.

Groypers are currently busting up Kirk memorials, because they're such unbelievable douches. It has nothing at all to do with "the left."

That's not stopping people in Fox News and Laura Loomer from trying to place blame on trans people and calling for us to be classified as a terrorist organization:

 

[eDuster]

I didn't even know who he was until someone killed him. Ironic?

 

[ibad]

Social media is a cancer, but so is the ideology that was espoused by Charlie Kirk. Not supporting his murder, that only strengthens his evil and debases better people. But, I'm not going to pretend that he was a decent or harmless person or cry bitter tears.

 

[Deleted member 1085004]

The middle ground is to ignore them until they commit a crime or such is obviously and materially imminent, same as the standard has always been. Now, in terms of social shame? Have at it. In terms of pressuring their livelihood or other non-governmental bit material impacts? It’s a tough rope to walk. Best we can do is muddle through it a bit. But, employ some charity, and realize that punishment is sometimes counterproductive.

Like, occasionally racists do mend their ways. But not because they get shamed out of it! It’s almost always because of a mix of people pushing back in smaller ways building up over time, and also personal experience. Nothing kills racism more than regular interaction with a counter-example! I realize that some people feel this is a burden, to feel the need to be a model minority or a socially acceptable gay person or what have you. Yes. It is a burden. But that doesn’t make the potential benefit of being a good example any less. Don’t shy away from this. Be a better father, better mother, better sibling, better friend, and moderation often follows. It’s a game of aggregation in some respects though. But that’s how minds change, it’s very rarely instant, so it’s crazy to me that some people seem to think that it’s still possible somehow. That’s just magical thinking, not enlightened leftism, and not effective rightism either.

The issue is claiming it's free speech when they're actively pushing for actions against them. It's not 1 to 100 with violence, it's utilizing force through the law to make sure a group of people don't exist.

For example, if someone thinks transpeople are against nature and its not possible that gender dysphoria exists, then it's their free speech right to think whatever they want. Except it's never about free speech - it's about applying by force into law the fact they shouldn't even exist and receive care.

For the most part, I find European soccer leagues dull and don't watch it, so I don't. That doesn't mean I actively go out and vote for people to put laws in place to impose my beliefs upon others by force and ban the sport from being played. It's amazing how many of the far right's grievances are 'I saw this person who's different and its weird and unusual to me so I'm uncomfortable, it shouldn't exist!'

Advocating for force and taking action for the state to do so through voting is an action, not speech. Saying to wait for someone to take it into their own hands is disingenuous since they already are.

 

[Deleted member 1085004]

You may want to examine the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. There are over 45,000 Christian sects, and they can't even agree among themselves what a "True Christian" is. Lutherans have told me that Catholics are not "True Christians" Catholics have told me that Mormons are not "True Christians", Pentecostalists tell me that they are the only "True Christian" church, etc. Further examination results in their accusations becoming circular. There are many "Christians" who identify with, and are indistinguishable from, Charlie Kirk in their strongly held beliefs. And, remember that religionists overwhelmingly supported getting Felon45 back into the White House.

White Evangelical Protestant: 81%
Hispanic Protestant: 63% (even after all his Hispanic attacks!)
White Catholic: 60%
White non-Evangelical Protestant: 57%
All the remaining ones are under 50%, but none are anywhere near zero.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
https://religionnews.com/2025/06/26...-with-catholics-nonwhite-protestants-in-2024/
https://www.arizonachristian.edu/20...istoric-victory-post-election-research-shows/
https://prri.org/spotlight/religion-and-the-2024-presidential-election/
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-r...s-in-other-us-religious-groups-prefer-harris/

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." Seneca (5 BCE - 65 CE)

I don't think he's being called fake because of the sect he's in, but for the fairly obvious interpretations of Jesus in the New Testament healing people and feeding the poor, making followers of the most disenfranchised, being God in the flesh with the powers to take down the state but called for separation, and calling out the wealthy obsessed with possessions.

KIrk and others are called fake because they don't abide by the most simple tenets in the New Testament that are fairly clear and easily interpreted. I would argue anymore that may be most 'Christians' anymore, with the encyclopedia-length rulesets of what's allowed and disallowed based on sexual behavior in Catholicism with virtually nothing to say on the behavior of capitalism and corporations.

 

[toolery]

Social media, in its current incarnation as an unmoderated wasteland that prioritizes engagement by any means necessary, is indeed a cancer. It helped unleash Trump on the world. What more proof do you need?

 

[JCarnage]

It is pretty clear that if you have radical opinions that you are spreading, you are definitely putting yourself at risk. This is true regardless of what side of the political spectrum you are on.

I have always thought that attacking these people is not the best way to be rid of them. That just makes them into heroes in the minds of some people. The best way is to let them gain some power and wait for them to inevitably screw things up in the country. They will then leave in disgrace and be forgotten. The MAGAs are doing a very good job at screwing things up and we need to simply give them enough rope and they will hang themselves.

It appears that Chuck was taken out because the Timothy didn't think he went right far enough. You may want to marinate on that for a bit.