Re: You're dodging the question

At least, politically. On a human level, it's a tragedy. The senseless loss of human life always is.

But for nearly two decades now the Beltway class, on the Right and Left, has intentionally framed every major policy debate, every election, every single damned thing "the last chance we have to X" or "this is a matter of life and death." Why are we shocked people have taken them at their word? Kirk didn't deserve to be killed, but anybody acting like this isn't the natural progression of what has been leveraged with glee as a cudgel for donations and political power, is laughable.

And, any one of you who has posted a thread on here to the likes of, "If we don't stop X soon it'll be too late" share responsibility as well.

So yeah. As a matter of politics, I just don't care. I hope things change. I hope the political elite realize the bed they've made is now no longer one they can safely sleep in, and we stop with the direct mail theatrics. But, this is not some great political travesty. It's the natural consequence of using rhetoric as a grift, and thinking you're immune from consequences of it (broadly speaking, not specific to Kirk himself).

If you're really shocked over this, then own it yourself. Stop pretending every single isolated incident is basically a harbinger of the end of days.

We've taken politics way too seriously, and treated it not just like sports, but as if it's a gladiator contest to the death. Yes, the situation we're in is frightening and untenable, but entirely predictable.

The Left can't point fingers when they first normalized "punch a Nazi." The day Richard Spencer got decked I said the natural conclusion of this will be justifying "moral murder." And the Right can't point fingers when the White House is dropping memes of Trump calling for war against American cities.

Don't like political commentators getting shot? There you go. You know who is to blame.

Classof09®

All-TigerNet [5880]

TigerPulse: 47%

Posts: 18950

Joined: 2005

This has become my new favorite thing with you guys

Sep 10, 2025, 11:50 PM

it's honestly wild you can make a post and not understand what you're even saying.

But here is an objective source:

Chat GPT Prompt: is this a both sides bad argument:

At least, politically. On a human level, it's a tragedy. The senseless loss of human life always is.

But for nearly two decades now the Beltway class, on the Right and Left, has intentionally framed every major policy debate, every election, every single ###### thing "the last chance we have to X" or "this is a matter of life and death." Why are we shocked people have taken them at their word? Kirk didn't deserve to be killed, but anybody acting like this isn't the natural progression of what has been leveraged with glee as a cudgel for donations and political power, is laughable.

And, any one of you who has posted a thread on here to the likes of, "If we don't stop X soon it'll be too late" share responsibility as well.

So yeah. As a matter of politics, I just don't care. I hope things change. I hope the political elite realize the bed they've made is now no longer one they can safely sleep in, and we stop with the direct mail theatrics. But, this is not some great political travesty. It's the natural consequence of using rhetoric as a grift, and thinking you're immune from consequences of it (broadly speaking, not specific to Kirk himself).

If you're really shocked over this, then own it yourself. Stop pretending every single isolated incident is basically a harbinger of the end of days.

We've taken politics way too seriously, and treated it not just like sports, but as if it's a gladiator contest to the death. Yes, the situation we're in is frightening and untenable, but entirely predictable.

The Left can't point fingers when they first normalized "punch a Nazi." The day Richard Spencer got decked I said the natural conclusion of this will be justifying "moral murder." And the Right can't point fingers when the White House is dropping memes of Trump calling for war against American cities.

Don't like political commentators getting shot? There you go. You know who is to blame.

ChatGPT said:
Yes — this is essentially a “both-sides bad” argument.
Here’s why:

1. Core Structure
The writer says:
The Left is culpable because they “normalized” violent rhetoric (e.g., “punch a Nazi” → escalates to “moral murder”).
The Right is culpable because they used violent imagery and rhetoric (e.g., Trump memes calling for war against American cities).
The public is culpable because everyday people amplify “last chance to save democracy” or “end of days” framing.
That framing puts blame on both partisan elites and their supporters rather than on one side in particular.

2. “Both Sides” Features
Symmetry of blame: It distributes responsibility across Left and Right in parallel examples.
Cynical equivalence: It downplays distinctions in degree, context, or consequence of rhetoric by saying “each side did its part.”
Consequences as inevitable: The murder/violence is framed as a predictable outcome of the system both parties built — not as something more attributable to one.

3. Why It May Be Called “Bad”
Equivalence fallacy: It risks suggesting that “punching Richard Spencer once” is morally/politically on par with a president’s violent imagery — even if the scale, power, and consequences differ.
Moral flattening: By attributing blame everywhere, it implies nobody is uniquely accountable.
Appeal to inevitability: By labeling violence as “the natural progression,” it takes responsibility off specific actors and makes it systemic fate.

✅ So yes: it’s a both-sides argument (sometimes called “whataboutism” or “false equivalence”) because it diffuses blame across Left, Right, and even the public, without distinguishing differences in power or proportion.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

"Smelley, Garcia, and Beecher are going to lead you to 4-8." - york_tiger

Going to be honest. I don't really care about what happened today.

Your post really sums up the problem though

My post has almost nothing to do with the specifics of the shooting.***

Which is precisely why you're getting to such a wrong conclusion

No.

Re: No.

###? Wait, youre serious. Gd.***

Secondly, your primary premise that one side has "less blame" is categorically

Do you ever take a second and really think about what you're saying?

Yes.

Do you honestly not get the real discussion point or are you just ignoring it

Sounds like that would make a good thread.

Re: Yes.

You hit on the real tragedy here

Re: You hit on the real tragedy here

Re: Yes.

that was a myopic read

Re: Your post really sums up the problem though

FYI, Trump wants to go into cities to stop criminals from preying on other

They are so gottam weak***

That's cute.***

Re: FYI, Trump wants to go into cities to stop criminals from preying on other

Re: Going to be honest. I don't really care about what happened today.

Punching Nazis actually seems like a pretty good policy.

Normalizing punching people we don't agree with, and considering it a

You're elevating Nazis to people who simply have different opinions.

There is a point here, Jimmy

So you're saying the ACLU was wrong for fighting for the rights of Skokie nazis?***

Also, I'm not saying you have to be tolerant of Nazis.

You're missing the point

All right man.

Possibly

Re: There is a point here, Jimmy

You're misunderstanding me.

That's exactly what is so scary

Buddy, calm down.

Re: Buddy, calm down.

No, we hear it because you're an actual Nazi***

Re: No, we hear it because you're an actual Nazi***

Re: No, we hear it because you're an actual Nazi***

It's not even about slapping the Nazi label on it.

Let's pretend for a second your premise is true

I don't.***

And you don't see how that eventually leads to conflict?

Nope.

You're dodging the question

Any speech can cause violence.***

I don't know. Let's say for instance that I had sex with Class09s mother.

It's a shame you don't understand you're arguing like an elementary school child

You can say I'm missing the bigger picture but you've spent this entire

This has become my new favorite thing with you guys

Not sure what you mean by "you guys."

Now you're just lying instead of admitting you're wrong***

Lying about what?***

Re: I don't know. Let's say for instance that I had sex with Class09s mother.

Yep.***

Re: You're dodging the question

The Holocaust says hello***

Just so we're clear.

No

Not sure where you got the impression I disagreed with that.***

I don't think you disagree with it

Next time I'll just send you my login credentials if you want to write a post

Let me save you the trouble:

Youre just wrong man

lol. okay.***

Re: The Holocaust says hello***

I don't even get why he's so worked up over "Nazis."

It's because you genuinely lack perspective

Re: Nope.

Exactly,

I remember when Buzz Aldrin punched the moon landing conspiracist

Yes, but it wasn't in the political mainstream until then.

Conservative speakers were getting deplatformed at colleges before that.

Eh, I disagree. But it's a subjective analysis so

They probably were, but my point is it goes back further than the spencer act

Similar to Murc, I see pretty stark differences, especially tracing the

Re: Punching Nazis actually seems like a pretty good policy.

Spencer is a self-proclaimed neo-nazi, white supremacist...