I’m going to get downvoted for this but we on the left get people fired too
No matter how you actually feel about Charlie Kirk’s death, no matter how deserving he was of these comments, posting them with your government name attached to it is a bad move
The problem is that the left gets people cancelled for hate speech. The right gets people cancelled for objective truth. Read the comments that people are getting fired for. It’s a blatant doouble standard that shifts the overton window on public discourse. Fascist bigots are running the country, and there’s no room for compromise with hate.
Nobody is “protected” from consequences of their speech. Free speech means we don’t have laws prohibiting speaking. It doesn’t mean you cannot be fired from your job, or people won’t call you a douchebag.
Everyone doing this sort of thing is sure that he’s the one speaking objective truth while his enemies are evil and destroying the country. The sight of so many people on the other side equally sure that they’re actually the ones speaking the objective truth ought to cause some self-doubt but it seldom does.
There really are people out there who are evil and people who are destroying the country (not necessarily the same people) but we either have rules for everyone or rules for no one. “Rules for them but not for me, since I’m speaking objective truth” is, in effect, rules for no one.
It’s good to be humble and open to being wrong. It’s bad to stop looking for objective truth. The “post-truth” stance is easily weaponized against the actual truth. Rules should protect the truth.
I’m not saying that people shouldn’t look for objective truth, but rather that the behavior of someone who thinks he’s probably right and the behavior of someone who thinks he’s definitely right are going to be quite different, and that we would all (probably) be better off if cultural norms favored the former sort of behavior rather than the latter.
Norms according to which it is ok for one side to attack the other in some way but it is not ok for the other side to respond in the same way (because the first side considers itself objectively correct) only work when the balance of power between the two sides is so uneven that it would often be called oppression. The desire to oppress others is a part of the human condition that everyone ought to be alert for in themselves - being on the left does not mean being immune. However, even those on the left who are in no mood for tolerance currently don’t have the power to win the fight their way - if tolerance doesn’t win then the right will win.
I should clarify what I mean by tolerance. I’m talking about the ability to co-exist peacefully even with the people that one hates. If this sort of tolerance breaks down, then the left is at a large disadvantage in the conflict that would follow - the right is generally more unified, better at violence, and in control of the federal government.
I cannot remember a single incident where the left ran a coordinated campaign to achieve mass doxings or firings of rightists. Not even those advocating for violence against minorities, which is a rampant, long-running problem. Maybe it’s because “the left” is not the monolith of violence, terror, and oppression that the Republican party and their international proxies are, but nevertheless this is a false equivalence, even if you did not intend for it to be.
There is a distinction without difference in terms of what you define as “coordinated” but there have been a decent number of folk over the years (less so in 2025…) who have been identified for being racist either in their own social media posting or when getting video taped by others who were doxxed and fired. A quick google brings up “Lilly Gaddis” who was apparently a “trad wife tiktokker” who was fired after using the n-word in a cooking video (also I thought the point of trad wifing was that you let some redneck stick it in you so you didn’t have to work but…).
Which is kind of the reality of the world. Yes, it is fucking infuriating to see people getting rounded up and fired for expressing relief at the death of a nazi who regularly called for the death of them and/or their loved ones. But it is also important to understand that we are ALL “PR” for our companies in the modern internet. We just don’t get any training. And someone doing crotch chops and making “protect ya neck” jokes about the violent murder of someone doesn’t reflect too well on KFC (for Popeye’s its just another Tuesday). And people need to be aware of that.
Its why: I have a LOT of fun with my various burners like this one (speaking of, it may be time to cycle this account). But on the social media with ties to my government name? I popped a few reposts on the tamer messages by my trans friends and then just texted/called them or went out for drinks. Because… this is late stage capitalism and I gotta eat. Which goes into the whole contrast of support and survival which is a very long conversation.
Could someone do a deep dive on everything I have ever said and figure out who I really am? Of course. But… anyone who knows who I am knows that I was not at all shaken up and got REALLY cheerful midway through the work day. But the difference is that that isn’t me actively representing my company as someone who cheers for the murder of nazis.
What I don’t get is why a company would judge these two things the same:
Someone using the n-word or other forms of hate speech.
Someone not exactly sad that a Nazi was shot. Are Nazis now a protected class? Also, from the way Taco and others talk, it’s provoking violence to call the Nazis and Nazi-adjacent out on their own ideology, I guess. That’s a wild take.
To paraphrase everyone’s basketball GOAT: “Bitch, nobody says no to me”. Err, sorry. To paraphrase the old everybody’s basketball GOAT: “Nazis buy sneakers too”
Actually taking a political stand potentially impacts sales. You and I think that anyone who would not want to buy a widget can go fuck themselves. Does EVERYONE at that company think so? What about their families. Lisa doesn’t get braces because you wanted to make a political statement?
Again, you and I probably both err more on the side of “fuck it, do what’s right”. But… the nazis feel the same way about anyone who would dare to acknowledge a trans person’s right to exist. Now Lisa doesn’t get braces because Johnny just wanted to masturbate on a trans person’s corpse and, really, how can that possibly be fair?
Which… gets to your second point. The world is REAL fucked up. And anyone with half a brain (who at all pays attention to politics) has expected this for some time now. Nazis ARE a protected class in the US (and increasingly parts of Europe…) at this point. So now letting Tom say something as fundamentally right as “the only good Nazi is a dead one” without any reprisal means the company faces that reprisal instead. You no longer get any government contracts and now you suddenly find the IRS actually cares about what you filed last year and…
Which changes it. It stops being Chuds versus Humans and instead becomes the people who are willing to put their necks on the line dragging down everyone who is just trying to survive.
Personally? You would need to be REAL fucking radical for me to penalize you at a company I have any control over. But… I would probably sign off on the “Our company believes that, regardless of beliefs, nobody should be executed in broad daylight and our hearts go out towards all those who are impacted”… after spending a few hours pissing off the lawyers to figure out exactly what I can get away with in there. And then I would pop on a VPN and do some REAL heavy shitposting and drinking.
And none of this is new. Back in the day, plenty of us would say things like “Dude, take off your fucking work shirt before you go to the punk show” and so forth.
Where was the “doxxing”? Since they were felons conducting terrorism, they were all persons of interest, but because they were allowed to just leave without being rounded up right then, they had to be identified and brought to justice.
What did you think people were supposed to do about terrorists still walking around free? Give them a Happy Meal and clap on the back for terrorism well done and being able to walk away from the scene of the crime?
They should just get to live their lives as normal after participating in terrorism in an event as noteworthy as 9/11?
Deliberate, orchestrated insurrection, murder, and terrorism is ethically and legally a crime, not speech. As such, those people were prosecuted for crimes.
As they should be. The authorities should be telling them this and/or the perp should be telling their employer themselves, as they have to show up to be booked for prison or their hearings, etc…
They are criminals. By all rights, these terrorists should have been arrested at the scene of their crime and having their employer know being the very least of their concerns…
Let me get this straight, you want the gestapo to be able to continue their completely racist nazi extermination protocol, without being able to be identified as the fucking filth that they are?
Turns out no one knows what devil’s advocate means
This is “devil’s advocate” in the same way ventilated neck guy engaged in “debate”.
In fact, trying to equate attempts to identify law enforcement engaged in unconstitutional acts is the same type of sophistry practiced by alt right dipshits.
So…Kirk was platformed specifically FOR his hate speech, but anyone not exactly sad about his death should be cancelled? Just trying to make sure I understand. The people being cancelled by the right wing doxxers are not calling for political violence, they are just dancing on the grave of someone who DID call for political violence. Doesn’t seem like we are talking apples and apples here.
As for saying stuff attached to your name - I get the Dark Forest theory; I practice it myself. No way in fucking hell I’m saying anything even mildly controversial in a public platform so that overly-emotional right wing children can give me any my family members death threats (any more[1]). Not that I say anything I think is even remotely controversial by a reasonable person, anyway.
It’s not that I’m the least bit afraid of any of these RW keyboard warriors if they’d fight fair, man on man, but I know they won’t. They would likely do a drive-by type thing and/or target my family members. Or try to get me fired for disagreeing with Nazis online…
[1] I learned my lesson long, long ago - I used to use my real name most everywhere. Got into some arguments with radicalized right wingers, and they tried to get me fired from my job. Thankfully the owner of the company at the time had my back and told them to get bent. I’ve had incidents of them posting/DMing/emailing my address and some of my family name members making not-so-veiled threats.
That may be true but it is important to show colors. Not just so the fascist know that there is still resistance, but also that your allies know that they are not alone.
I’m going to get downvoted for this but we on the left get people fired too
No matter how you actually feel about Charlie Kirk’s death, no matter how deserving he was of these comments, posting them with your government name attached to it is a bad move
The problem is that the left gets people cancelled for hate speech. The right gets people cancelled for objective truth. Read the comments that people are getting fired for. It’s a blatant doouble standard that shifts the overton window on public discourse. Fascist bigots are running the country, and there’s no room for compromise with hate.
Not a legal designation and legally protected as regular speech. Legal protections don’t extend to private action, and opinions aren’t truth.
Anyhow, firing public employees speaking as private citizens over public concerns violates 1ˢᵗ amendment rights to free speech under the Pickering test.
Nobody is “protected” from consequences of their speech. Free speech means we don’t have laws prohibiting speaking. It doesn’t mean you cannot be fired from your job, or people won’t call you a douchebag.
I suggest you work on your reading as I wrote the same regarding private action.
Everyone doing this sort of thing is sure that he’s the one speaking objective truth while his enemies are evil and destroying the country. The sight of so many people on the other side equally sure that they’re actually the ones speaking the objective truth ought to cause some self-doubt but it seldom does.
There really are people out there who are evil and people who are destroying the country (not necessarily the same people) but we either have rules for everyone or rules for no one. “Rules for them but not for me, since I’m speaking objective truth” is, in effect, rules for no one.
It’s good to be humble and open to being wrong. It’s bad to stop looking for objective truth. The “post-truth” stance is easily weaponized against the actual truth. Rules should protect the truth.
I’m not saying that people shouldn’t look for objective truth, but rather that the behavior of someone who thinks he’s probably right and the behavior of someone who thinks he’s definitely right are going to be quite different, and that we would all (probably) be better off if cultural norms favored the former sort of behavior rather than the latter.
Norms according to which it is ok for one side to attack the other in some way but it is not ok for the other side to respond in the same way (because the first side considers itself objectively correct) only work when the balance of power between the two sides is so uneven that it would often be called oppression. The desire to oppress others is a part of the human condition that everyone ought to be alert for in themselves - being on the left does not mean being immune. However, even those on the left who are in no mood for tolerance currently don’t have the power to win the fight their way - if tolerance doesn’t win then the right will win.
Would you mind expanding on this? I can think of a few very different interpretations.
I should clarify what I mean by tolerance. I’m talking about the ability to co-exist peacefully even with the people that one hates. If this sort of tolerance breaks down, then the left is at a large disadvantage in the conflict that would follow - the right is generally more unified, better at violence, and in control of the federal government.
Bull, and I cannot stress this enough, crap. Conservative ideology eschews objective truth in favor of beneficial positions every fucking time.
I cannot remember a single incident where the left ran a coordinated campaign to achieve mass doxings or firings of rightists. Not even those advocating for violence against minorities, which is a rampant, long-running problem. Maybe it’s because “the left” is not the monolith of violence, terror, and oppression that the Republican party and their international proxies are, but nevertheless this is a false equivalence, even if you did not intend for it to be.
There is a distinction without difference in terms of what you define as “coordinated” but there have been a decent number of folk over the years (less so in 2025…) who have been identified for being racist either in their own social media posting or when getting video taped by others who were doxxed and fired. A quick google brings up “Lilly Gaddis” who was apparently a “trad wife tiktokker” who was fired after using the n-word in a cooking video (also I thought the point of trad wifing was that you let some redneck stick it in you so you didn’t have to work but…).
Which is kind of the reality of the world. Yes, it is fucking infuriating to see people getting rounded up and fired for expressing relief at the death of a nazi who regularly called for the death of them and/or their loved ones. But it is also important to understand that we are ALL “PR” for our companies in the modern internet. We just don’t get any training. And someone doing crotch chops and making “protect ya neck” jokes about the violent murder of someone doesn’t reflect too well on KFC (for Popeye’s its just another Tuesday). And people need to be aware of that.
Its why: I have a LOT of fun with my various burners like this one (speaking of, it may be time to cycle this account). But on the social media with ties to my government name? I popped a few reposts on the tamer messages by my trans friends and then just texted/called them or went out for drinks. Because… this is late stage capitalism and I gotta eat. Which goes into the whole contrast of support and survival which is a very long conversation.
Could someone do a deep dive on everything I have ever said and figure out who I really am? Of course. But… anyone who knows who I am knows that I was not at all shaken up and got REALLY cheerful midway through the work day. But the difference is that that isn’t me actively representing my company as someone who cheers for the murder of nazis.
What I don’t get is why a company would judge these two things the same:
To paraphrase everyone’s basketball GOAT: “Bitch, nobody says no to me”. Err, sorry. To paraphrase the old everybody’s basketball GOAT: “Nazis buy sneakers too”
Actually taking a political stand potentially impacts sales. You and I think that anyone who would not want to buy a widget can go fuck themselves. Does EVERYONE at that company think so? What about their families. Lisa doesn’t get braces because you wanted to make a political statement?
Again, you and I probably both err more on the side of “fuck it, do what’s right”. But… the nazis feel the same way about anyone who would dare to acknowledge a trans person’s right to exist. Now Lisa doesn’t get braces because Johnny just wanted to masturbate on a trans person’s corpse and, really, how can that possibly be fair?
Which… gets to your second point. The world is REAL fucked up. And anyone with half a brain (who at all pays attention to politics) has expected this for some time now. Nazis ARE a protected class in the US (and increasingly parts of Europe…) at this point. So now letting Tom say something as fundamentally right as “the only good Nazi is a dead one” without any reprisal means the company faces that reprisal instead. You no longer get any government contracts and now you suddenly find the IRS actually cares about what you filed last year and…
Which changes it. It stops being Chuds versus Humans and instead becomes the people who are willing to put their necks on the line dragging down everyone who is just trying to survive.
Personally? You would need to be REAL fucking radical for me to penalize you at a company I have any control over. But… I would probably sign off on the “Our company believes that, regardless of beliefs, nobody should be executed in broad daylight and our hearts go out towards all those who are impacted”… after spending a few hours pissing off the lawyers to figure out exactly what I can get away with in there. And then I would pop on a VPN and do some REAL heavy shitposting and drinking.
And none of this is new. Back in the day, plenty of us would say things like “Dude, take off your fucking work shirt before you go to the punk show” and so forth.
j6
So, terrorists? Are you really saying that’s the same thing as people celebrating the shooting of a Nazi?
no. I’m pointing at a mass doxxing campaign
Where was the “doxxing”? Since they were felons conducting terrorism, they were all persons of interest, but because they were allowed to just leave without being rounded up right then, they had to be identified and brought to justice.
there were people being reported to their employers. you might not remember or believe it, but it was a doxxing campaign
What did you think people were supposed to do about terrorists still walking around free? Give them a Happy Meal and clap on the back for terrorism well done and being able to walk away from the scene of the crime?
They should just get to live their lives as normal after participating in terrorism in an event as noteworthy as 9/11?
disengage
The exception that proves the point. Have an upvote
Deliberate, orchestrated insurrection, murder, and terrorism is ethically and legally a crime, not speech. As such, those people were prosecuted for crimes.
and there was a mass doxxing campaign by overly online liberals. the criminal charges are irrelevant to that fact.
How is that “doxxing”? These were criminals still walking around free.
and some people were doxxed to their employers.
As they should be. The authorities should be telling them this and/or the perp should be telling their employer themselves, as they have to show up to be booked for prison or their hearings, etc…
They are criminals. By all rights, these terrorists should have been arrested at the scene of their crime and having their employer know being the very least of their concerns…
disengage
deleted by creator
Government agents should always be clearly identified. Face, name, badge number, etc.
deleted by creator
Let me get this straight, you want the gestapo to be able to continue their completely racist nazi extermination protocol, without being able to be identified as the fucking filth that they are?
deleted by creator
I guess maybe the part where you think identifying nazi filth is a bad thing.
deleted by creator
This is “devil’s advocate” in the same way ventilated neck guy engaged in “debate”.
In fact, trying to equate attempts to identify law enforcement engaged in unconstitutional acts is the same type of sophistry practiced by alt right dipshits.
So…Kirk was platformed specifically FOR his hate speech, but anyone not exactly sad about his death should be cancelled? Just trying to make sure I understand. The people being cancelled by the right wing doxxers are not calling for political violence, they are just dancing on the grave of someone who DID call for political violence. Doesn’t seem like we are talking apples and apples here.
As for saying stuff attached to your name - I get the Dark Forest theory; I practice it myself. No way in fucking hell I’m saying anything even mildly controversial in a public platform so that overly-emotional right wing children can give me any my family members death threats (any more[1]). Not that I say anything I think is even remotely controversial by a reasonable person, anyway.
It’s not that I’m the least bit afraid of any of these RW keyboard warriors if they’d fight fair, man on man, but I know they won’t. They would likely do a drive-by type thing and/or target my family members. Or try to get me fired for disagreeing with Nazis online…
[1] I learned my lesson long, long ago - I used to use my real name most everywhere. Got into some arguments with radicalized right wingers, and they tried to get me fired from my job. Thankfully the owner of the company at the time had my back and told them to get bent. I’ve had incidents of them posting/DMing/emailing my address and some of my family name members making not-so-veiled threats.
That may be true but it is important to show colors. Not just so the fascist know that there is still resistance, but also that your allies know that they are not alone.