shut up oh my god with this lib shit. don’t clutch them pearls so hard.
no, laughing at a horrible person dying the way he wanted others to die every day is not lowering yourself to his level where he laughed at minorities and political opponents being shot and advocated for more of it.
and you’re wrong, the circumstances make it objectively funny. this is how you’d kill someone in a movie like Airplane, without the graphic imagery. people laughing at this aren’t necessarily saying it’s good that this kind of thing happens, or it should happen more; charlie kirk did. his last word was “violence”. maybe he shouldn’t have been advocating for gun violence with a massive head and neck that are hard to miss.
in this case, way up. he was an advisor to the president. had massive role in his election, and has been advocating for death, destruction and genocide. there aren’t too many more instances where you can punch higher up than this.
Not sure: up implies power, usually political or economic class.
He was an influential, right-wing activist promoting objectionable views.
More like a cheerleader than commander.
The only power he seemed to exercise was the power of any activist (to express their views) who lacks political office.
If we swap their political views, would any funny there be punching up?
he’d had foster friess’ backing since he was 18-19. also was mentored by bill montgomery. Toilet Paper USA didn’t just come from nowhere. he was handpicked. saying he had any activist’s power is like saying musk donating to a campaign is just like anyone’s contribution. now musk being the rizzless fucking idiot still managed to fuck it up but that doesn’t mean he’s on equal grounds as anyone.
I will not laugh though, because I look at myself and I see the same potential for evil in myself. I can see how I could become a Hitler or a Pol Pot and orchestrate horrific things while convincing myself I am right. Laughing at the death of a man who espoused violence and shunned empathy isn’t going to complete that transformation, but it is a step in that direction.
P.S.
I originally posted a meme, but I thought it was too glib for this conversation.
I’m not advocating tolerance. The key difference is laughing at someone’s death isn’t just an expression of disapproval, it is a devaluation of human life in general. It isn’t a question of being justified in laughing at their demise because they laughed at horrible things; the very act of laughing degrades yourself.
Let me put it another way: Epstein and his accomplices deserved to be gang raped by all of us in prison. Should we run a train on them? No! Because that defiles us as much as it does them.
shut up oh my god with this lib shit. don’t clutch them pearls so hard.
no, laughing at a horrible person dying the way he wanted others to die every day is not lowering yourself to his level where he laughed at minorities and political opponents being shot and advocated for more of it.
and you’re wrong, the circumstances make it objectively funny. this is how you’d kill someone in a movie like Airplane, without the graphic imagery. people laughing at this aren’t necessarily saying it’s good that this kind of thing happens, or it should happen more; charlie kirk did. his last word was “violence”. maybe he shouldn’t have been advocating for gun violence with a massive head and neck that are hard to miss.
Which direction does the funny punch, though? Up, down, sideways?
in this case, way up. he was an advisor to the president. had massive role in his election, and has been advocating for death, destruction and genocide. there aren’t too many more instances where you can punch higher up than this.
Not sure: up implies power, usually political or economic class. He was an influential, right-wing activist promoting objectionable views. More like a cheerleader than commander.
The only power he seemed to exercise was the power of any activist (to express their views) who lacks political office.
If we swap their political views, would any funny there be punching up?
he’d had foster friess’ backing since he was 18-19. also was mentored by bill montgomery. Toilet Paper USA didn’t just come from nowhere. he was handpicked. saying he had any activist’s power is like saying musk donating to a campaign is just like anyone’s contribution. now musk being the rizzless fucking idiot still managed to fuck it up but that doesn’t mean he’s on equal grounds as anyone.
You do you. I cannot change your mind.
I will not laugh though, because I look at myself and I see the same potential for evil in myself. I can see how I could become a Hitler or a Pol Pot and orchestrate horrific things while convincing myself I am right. Laughing at the death of a man who espoused violence and shunned empathy isn’t going to complete that transformation, but it is a step in that direction.
P.S. I originally posted a meme, but I thought it was too glib for this conversation.
I get your point but it feels like just a spin on the paradox of tolerance.
My enemy in this case is laughing at something they support happening to someone they don’t support.
I am (not really) laughing at something i don’t support that happend to someone who does supports that thing.
The thing here being, far too easy acces to firearms and the inevitable deaths resulting from it.
I also feel like its more a dopamine approval of the general karma of the situation then it is a literal celebration of lost life.
I’m not advocating tolerance. The key difference is laughing at someone’s death isn’t just an expression of disapproval, it is a devaluation of human life in general. It isn’t a question of being justified in laughing at their demise because they laughed at horrible things; the very act of laughing degrades yourself.
Let me put it another way: Epstein and his accomplices deserved to be gang raped by all of us in prison. Should we run a train on them? No! Because that defiles us as much as it does them.