Загрузка видео...
Не удалось загрузить видео
Charlie Kirk transformed lives through debate not hate. If the left refuses to debate and chooses violence, we have a right to defend ourselves.
29,505 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)
Комментарии: 0
Нет доступных комментариев
Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста
![🚨 James Harr of Means Workwear Defends the Assassination of Charlie Kirk In his telling, Charlie Kirk didn’t die because of a deranged assassin, he died because he debated people. “The rhetoric of Charlie Kirk… the debate that Charlie Kirk engaged in… that catalyzed, that bled out into broad political violence. Everything we’re seeing with the Trump regime, ICE, anti-transit, all that, it stems from Charlie Kirk and his ilk. It stems from the political violence of the debate itself.” This is the logic of totalitarianism. Harr insists debate is “inherently violent” and therefore should not exist: “Those debates honestly should not [exist]… To think about Charlie Kirk’s debate world and to think that’s not an inherently violent space… is delusion.” The message here is chilling: if you engage in public debate, you are guilty of “violence,” and if someone kills you, well — you had it coming. This is what passes for “analysis” on the radical left today: not a defense of speech, not a defense of dissent, but a justification for silencing opponents by force. And it’s coming from someone who, on top of it all, hawks Hamas fanboy t-shirts for a living.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1965958516172083698/amplify_video_thumb/1965958317089456128/img/xIqcUD-iXXt4a53L.jpg)
