Wokeness killed Charlie Kirk.

[frigidweirdo]

Fair enough. I'm not commanding you to do things.

It's a challenge, but it involves searching videos, then writing down what has been said in order to prove this.

I did go and research Kirk, because I had no idea who he was, and I wanted to see if he was wrong or not. And I found he was.

I saw a video about democracy, and I saw a video about "why the US is so divided?" and in both cases what people said about him was right.

I haven't looked up his racism, or hatred of other people yet, but I am expecting to find more of the same.

And my work colleague from Mississippi likes people like Kirk and he has this general racism about him. He doesn't think he's a racist, but then comes out with things like "black people preferred it under segregation to now" as a way of saying "segregation wasn't so bad, was it?" kind of argument.

Racism "lite".

And I expect to see Kirk say such things.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's a challenge, but it involves searching videos, then writing down what has been said in order to prove this.

I did go and research Kirk, because I had no idea who he was, and I wanted to see if he was wrong or not. And I found he was.

I saw a video about democracy, and I saw a video about "why the US is so divided?" and in both cases what people said about him was right.

I haven't looked up his racism, or hatred of other people yet, but I am expecting to find more of the same.

And my work colleague from Mississippi likes people like Kirk and he has this general racism about him. He doesn't think he's a racist, but then comes out with things like "black people preferred it under segregation to now" as a way of saying "segregation wasn't so bad, was it?" kind of argument.

Racism "lite".

And I expect to see Kirk say such things.

Tell you what.

What helps me in debates here is using AI, like Grok (mostly). I'm an AI super user at this point. I find it far better than standard Google searches.

On the other hand, you shouldn't instantly label someone 'racist' just because they come from a state in the old South. I'm from Georgia.

Also, if I were you, I wouldn't approach this with any preconceived biases.

 

[TemplarKormac]

https://x.com/i/grok/share/HffmXjLpxKpCvsdKD1Lj2O4Cs

 

[frigidweirdo]

Tell you what.

What helps me in debates here is using AI, like Grok (mostly). I'm an AI super user at this point. I find it far better than standard Google searches.

On the other hand, you shouldn't impose racism on someone just because they come from a state in the old South. I'm from Georgia.

Also, if I were you, I wouldn't approach this with any preconceived biases.

Well, the task at hand involves going onto youtube and seeing what he actually said and analysing it. I don't trust AI.

I don't say people are racists because they're from the South. My work colleague has earned that. I also work with some South Africans, the black South African girl is racist. Again, racism light. She doesn't hate people because they're white, not that kind of racism, but she also says no politician she would vote for would be white.

So, I take people as they come.

I have to approach it with preconceived bias because otherwise I wouldn't do it. I am, however, a very open person. I got into internet forums after the Columbine High School killings. I knew what I knew, which was more than I actually knew, and at some point in the mid 2000s I figured out I was wrong on a lot of things.

So, if I do an analysis, it will be honest.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So, if I do an analysis, it will be honest.

I trust that it will.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I have to approach it with preconceived bias because otherwise I wouldn't do it.

My first approach to an assertion is its veracity. Is it true? Is it accurate? Do I support the claim it makes or not? Does my support matter? Are my biases impacting my interpretation of this assertion?

 

[the watcher]

It's a good thing we don't judge people here, that isn't nice.

 

[frigidweirdo]

My first approach to an assertion is its veracity. Is it true? Is it accurate? Do I support the claim it makes or not? Does my support matter? Are my biases impacting my interpretation of this assertion?

Yeah, and so far, researching Kirk, everything has been true. He really is as bad as people say he is. He just smiles.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Yeah, and so far, researching Kirk, everything has been true. He really is as bad as people say he is. He just smiles.

The thing is, you're already convinced. Openness means leaving what you think of the person behind.

This mod position? I had to do the same thing. It doesn't matter what I think of anyone here anymore; I have to treat everyone equally, regardless of how I feel about them personally.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The thing is, you're already convinced. Openness means leaving what you think of the person behind.

This mod position? I had to do the same thing. It doesn't matter what I think of anyone here anymore; I have to treat everyone equally, regardless of how I feel about them personally.

Not at all. I'm very quick to change my view IF I find information that changes that view.

However I don't expect to find a need to change. Maybe I will, but I don't expect it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

However I don't expect to find a need to change. Maybe I will, but I don't expect it.

Well, I found from experience not to expect anything going in.

 

[TemplarKormac]

From Grok:

Based on a review of fact-checks, media analyses, and public discourse (including viral X posts and articles post-Kirk's death in September 2025), the most prominent inaccuracies about Charlie Kirk's political positions often stem from misquotes, out-of-context clips, or exaggerations amplified on social media and by critics. These distortions are frequently used to portray him as more extreme, bigoted, or inconsistent than his actual statements suggest. While Kirk held controversial conservative views—such as opposition to affirmative action, transgender rights, and abortion—many viral claims oversimplify or fabricate elements. Below, I list the most commonly circulated inaccuracies (based on high-engagement posts and fact-check coverage), elaborated with context, why they're inaccurate, and his reported actual positions.

1. Claim: Kirk advocated for stoning gay people to death.

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: This is one of the most viral distortions, often shared in anti-conservative memes and posts (e.g., novelist Stephen King initially spread it before apologizing). It arises from a 2024 podcast where Kirk misquoted Leviticus (mixing 18:22 and 20:13) as "Thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death," but he was critiquing selective biblical interpretations, not endorsing violence. Fact-checks confirm he never called for stoning; it's a decontextualized clip used to label him a violent homophobe.
• Actual Position: Kirk opposed LGBTQ+ rights, calling the movement harmful and advocating bans on gender-affirming care for minors, but he focused on cultural and policy critiques, not physical violence.

2. Claim: Kirk used a racial slur against an Asian woman in a debate.

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: A montage video from a 2018 Politicon debate went viral post-death, claiming Kirk repeatedly called an Asian audience member a slur starting with "c." Fact-checks (e.g., from FactCheck.org) show he was yelling "Cenk" (referring to Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks), not a slur, and no Asian woman was targeted. This has been viewed millions of times on X and TikTok, fueling racism accusations.
• Actual Position: Kirk made other race-related comments (e.g., questioning DEI hires like Black pilots), but this incident was a personal debate exchange, not racial.

3. Claim: Kirk said Black women (or all Black people) lack "brain processing power."

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: This generalized claim exploded online, especially after AOC and others referenced it. It stems from a 2023 podcast where Kirk criticized specific Black women (e.g., Michelle Obama, Ketanji Brown Jackson) as "affirmative action picks" without the "brain processing power" for serious roles. Critics omit the context (DEI critique) to imply blanket racism, leading to misrepresentations like AOC's that distorted his views further.
• Actual Position: Kirk opposed affirmative action and DEI as "anti-white," questioning qualifications of specific figures, but denied systemic racism and promoted "colorblind" meritocracy.

4. Claim: Kirk called the Civil Rights Act a "mistake" and wanted to undo protections for Black people.

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: Amplified by figures like AOC and viral X threads, this misquotes Kirk's 2023 remarks where he said the Act became an "anti-white weapon" due to loopholes and overreach (e.g., in DEI enforcement). He never called it a full "mistake" or advocated repealing core protections; critics like AOC exaggerated it to suggest he opposed equality entirely, ignoring his focus on federal overreach.
• Actual Position: Kirk criticized the Act's evolution into what he saw as reverse discrimination, blamed MLK for its "myths," but supported equal rights in principle while opposing modern interpretations.

5. Claim: Kirk believed all gun deaths are acceptable and opposed any reforms.

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: Post-Parkland and other shootings, critics paraphrased his 2023 quote ("some gun deaths" are "worth it" for Second Amendment rights) to claim total indifference. This ignores context: he acknowledged tragedies but prioritized rights; fact-checks note he supported reforms like school security, not a blanket rejection.
• Actual Position: Staunch gun rights advocate who viewed armed citizens and practical measures (e.g., metal detectors) as solutions, accepting some risks for freedoms.

6. Claim: Kirk was antisemitic and secretly opposed Israel.

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: Conspiracy theories post-death (e.g., blaming Israel for his assassination) cite his 2023 comments on Jewish donors funding "anti-white" causes, but distort them as full antisemitism. He was pro-Israel, defending Gaza actions and debunking atrocity claims; Netanyahu praised him. Critics ignore this to tie him to far-right fringes.
• Actual Position: Supported Israel strongly, promoted "great replacement" theory as immigration-focused, but criticized specific Jewish philanthropy without broader opposition.

7. Claim: Kirk said women should not vote or work, especially over 30.

• Elaboration on Inaccuracy: Feminist critiques amplify edited clips from podcasts where he promoted traditional roles (e.g., motherhood over careers as a "choice"). He never proposed bans; claims like "women over 30 shouldn't vote" are fabrications, used to frame him as anti-women's rights.
• Actual Position: Advocated for family priorities and critiqued feminism, but supported women's voting, working, and success on merit.

These inaccuracies represent about 40-50% of high-visibility discourse, per sampling of viral content, often driven by partisan amplification rather than outright fabrication.

 

[SweetTea]

It's a challenge, but it involves searching videos, then writing down what has been said in order to prove this.

I did go and research Kirk, because I had no idea who he was, and I wanted to see if he was wrong or not. And I found he was.

I saw a video about democracy, and I saw a video about "why the US is so divided?" and in both cases what people said about him was right.

I haven't looked up his racism, or hatred of other people yet, but I am expecting to find more of the same.

And my work colleague from Mississippi likes people like Kirk and he has this general racism about him. He doesn't think he's a racist, but then comes out with things like "black people preferred it under segregation to now" as a way of saying "segregation wasn't so bad, was it?" kind of argument.

Racism "lite".

And I expect to see Kirk say such things.

Make sure you watch Charlie in full context, not in clips provided by left-wing media outlets. Watch directly from Turning Point USA on YouTube. You may be very surprised to find out that quotes have been meticulously cherry-picked by the left to create a false narrative. Most of those that want to believe it, don’t even take the time to fully investigate.

 

[Raynine]

Tell you what.

What helps me in debates here is using AI, like Grok (mostly). I'm an AI super user at this point. I find it far better than standard Google searches.

On the other hand, you shouldn't instantly label someone 'racist' just because they come from a state in the old South. I'm from Georgia.

Also, if I were you, I wouldn't approach this with any preconceived biases.

I like AI (Chat GBT). I ask it to go into professor mode. When I write something it tells me if I am ranting. It does not rewrite for me but it encourges me to rewrite so I am not ranting.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, I found from experience not to expect anything going in.

Yeah, but I've been doing this for 26 years.

You start seeing patterns. And most of the time those patterns are reinforced.

Real Charlie Kirk quote about Black pilot qualifications circulates online

During a 2024 podcast episode, Kirk said, "If I see a Black pilot, I'm gonna be like, 'Boy, I hope he's qualified.'"

www.snopes.com

“If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.”

This is a quote he made. It's also a quote that people post on its own to prove he's a racist, and people, like my Mississippi work colleague, who say it's taken out of context.

The context. The other guy, Jack whoever, says something like "when I got on the plane, I'm glad I saw the pilot, because when turbulence hits, I'm confident."

Kirk says "If you want to go thought crime, I'm sorry, if I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified."

Then after he says "that's not who I am, that's not what I believe, but I want to be as blunt as possible, because now I'm connecting two dots. Wait a second, this CEO just said that he's forcing that a white qualified guy is not gonna get the job. So I see this guy, he might be a nice person and I say, "Boy, I hope he's not a Harvard-style affirmative-action student that … landed half of his flight-simulator trials."

"It also … creates unhealthy thinking patterns. I don't wanna think that way. And no one should, right? … And by the way, then you couple it with the FAA, air-traffic control, they got a bunch of morons and affirmative-action people."

Now, you can take this in different ways. Kirk talking about how this isn't him, BUT HE'S SAYING IT. He wants people to think that a black guy "well, might be DEI", all of a sudden it's putting thoughts into people's heads.

Now, he'd probably argue that this is DEI's fault.

But this is where Kirk is very flimsy. Will he take this further, will he say why DEI is there? Because black people are more likely to be born in ghettos? Have higher poverty rates, less likely to have fathers, more likely to get into gangs, less likely to finish high school?

No?

He wasn't detailed enough to get away with such a quote without appearing to be a racist. He pushed certain thoughts like this, and it's the same thought processes that had slavery, segregation and the "we're all equal, but we're still not" after Brown v. Board of Education.

It's the sort of argument I found here:

The first guy he's talking talk, they talk about whether BLM was riots or protests. Kirk is very adamant that they were ALL riots. Not protests.

Again, it's this racism "lite", it's arguments to keep black people in their place, that have been refined for centuries in the South, especially, but not exclusively.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Make sure you watch Charlie in full context, not in clips provided by left-wing media outlets. Watch directly from Turning Point USA on YouTube. You may be very surprised to find out that quotes have been meticulously cherry-picked by the left to create a false narrative. Most of those that want to believe it, don’t even take the time to fully investigate.

Well, check out my reply I just wrote. It's short, I don't have the time to write a huge thing and collect loads of evidence. But it's as close to the truth as I can get.

 

[0311]

The city I grew up in is just a few miles away and it is in the grip of wokeness. What kinds of citizens does this produce? Do you recall in 2009 when Barack Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for “looking good”? Well, those city voters thought that was a great idea! And if anyone questioned the absurdity of the award those voters and their media called them racists. Name calling and smearing are big with liberals because it zeroes out different opinions full stop. If someone utters something that does not fit the woke model you just call them Nazis, and all dialogue ends with you being right!

The woke mind is so certain it is right that it will not tolerate opposition. This is extremely dangerous. The woke mind will go to extremes to get power and keep it. It will encourage supporters to harass different thinkers like Maxine Waters did in 2018. This likely encouraged violence that ensued.

But the rest of the country is not jack-booted liberal. Not only that but occasionally an upstart like Charlie Kirk comes along that rally's and inspires voters, especially young voters, to think in terms that are not woke. This is when wokeness reveals itself to be the religious cultism it really is. I have no doubt that my old woke city fully supports late night TV host Jimmy Kimmel and his false smearing of a MAGA supporter as the culprit that fired the lethal shot.

Liberals there are influenced by their leadership and media to think a certain way. I don’t have a satisfactory answer to fix this. When wokeness is in control as it is there the city becomes ideologically tribalistic and fear can be used to discipline thought. I never thought anything like that could happen in that city.

There were two assassination tries on the current president before the successful one on Kirk. It is a heavily democrat voting city but when political, moral and cultural righteousness lead to assassinations as the tool of choice to remove troublemakers something is very wrong with the party that controls it.

His brand of Fascism, Bigotry Homophobia, Islamophobia and Racism killed the asshole!

 

[leftwinger]

They infect all. Poison the Children any way they can. In school or out. They are woking.

*******
Susan Rice went from the Obama Admin to Netflix and Netflix almost immediately started pushing woke ideology.

There are no coincidences.

They already weaponized the Federal Government against their enemies.

Next they wanted to shape the culture and groom your kids.

Evil.

 

[g5000]

What is "wokeness"? Because I'm sure your version and my version are two very different things

Wokeness is anything or anyone who would not eat the corn out of Dear Leader's shit, basically.

 

[g5000]

Wokeness is any mention of American history which touches on slavery.

All mention of slavery must be erased.

Wokeness is any mention of American history which touches on the Jim Crow era.

All mention of Whites Only lunch counters, water fountains, motels, and bathrooms must be erased.

All mention of lynchings, church bombings, and the murders of civil rights leaders must be erased.

All mention of homosexuals, past or present, must be erased. No homosexuals must be allowed out of the closet. Ever.

Being inferior, no negroes must ever be elevated to positions of authority or leadership. This DEI bullshit must end now.

If anyone has a (D) after their name, they are, by definition, woke enemies of the people and we must engage in warfare against them, using our armed forces when necessary.