Comments on: Perspective From the Right on the Charlie Kirk Assassination /politics/perspective-from-the-right-on-the-charlie-kirk-assassination/ Fact-based, well-reasoned perspectives from around the world Tue, 30 Sep 2025 06:14:09 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Peter Isackson /politics/perspective-from-the-right-on-the-charlie-kirk-assassination/#comment-40647 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 13:45:50 +0000 /?p=158018#comment-40647 I have to laugh at the imagination of those who think there is something out there called “the left” and that its members are called “leftists.” First, there is no set of doctrines that apply to whoever these people are supposed to be. Is it a synomym for Democrats? It doesn’t seem likely because there are few who, in the judgment of anyone outside the US, would be recognize as having anything to do with the left. It’s true that the notion of “the right” has a little bit more substance to it, since it generally means people who accept and defend an undefined status quo… and do so vehemently and patriotically. But that also describes most Democrats. it’s rarer to see the word “rightist” ever mentioned. So I have to ask myself. Where is the enemy? Tyler Robinson seemed to care about one issue: gender. But if that defines the left, those who embrace either the Marxist or Rooseveltian (Keynesian) tradition would feel completely lost. Tyler Robinson seems to be more of a rightwing gender warrior than anything else.

]]> By: Roberta Artemisia Campani /politics/perspective-from-the-right-on-the-charlie-kirk-assassination/#comment-40646 Wed, 17 Sep 2025 16:51:59 +0000 /?p=158018#comment-40646 I will always abhor violence and killing, in any case including death penalty, I think states that support it have an inherent problem because it has been abused more often than not. I have compassion and sympathy for his widow and orphaned children.

Yours is radical moral framing — it leaves little room for nuance or compromise and neither for dialogue. You suggest the right (which is also composed of many nuances of opinions and many among them didn’t agree with Kirk’s style and rhetoric) stops debating. Does this mean doing away with all those who don’t “measure up” to your radical moralization of politics? Shouldn’t politics be separate from religion in a secular nation such as the United States of America? Well, some say it’s just a façade.

You draw – with your first sentence – a sharp binary: those who uphold the “good, true, beautiful” vs. those on the “Left,” who are presumably denying, corrupting, or replacing those high values. It implicitly claims that one side has the monopoly on virtue. Yet I keep believing that this way of thinking is what instills violence in our world, because it encourages exclusion and guilt even for simply not being born in the right place.

How can anyone feel morally superior to anyone else?

ah, some reading

]]>