Charlie Kirk now being compared to McCarthy/McCarthyism.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

How soon before we start talking about people being fired for political speech as being “Charlie Kirked?” His little fans are really sullying his name. I had never heard of him but I’ve now developed an extreme dislike of him.

[LonePirate]

1. I posted numerous TikTok comments about how the Kirk related job firings were McCarthyism 2.0.

The MAGA crew is over the moon with efforts to fire people who voiced even mild criticism of Kirk. We're in the midst of a new flavor of the Red Scare.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

2. What an honor for him. I don't think anyone would want their name being attached to this ugliness.

[LonePirate]

4. The MAGA crew has a bloodlust right now which this country has not seen since the Klan's or Confederacy's heyday.

They are proud to attach themselves to this ugliness because they think they have unchecked and eternal power along with a permission structure to do as they please.

[karynnj]

17. MAGA likely does not see this as ugliness,

but as removing people who changed America from their image of 1950 style greatness looking through the lens of white male perspective. Before most of the civil rights, women rights and gay rights were fought for.

What is startling is how quickly and how completely they both glorified Kirk and socialized how he had to be honored EVEN BY PEOPLE HE SAID DISGUSTING, INAPPROPRIATE THINGS ABOUT.

They never credited that almost all Democratic figures had statements that were strongly against the violence that took his life and calls for civility. They lowered the flag to half mast, something they did not do for the Minnesota legislator who was murdered with her husband. They celebrated his life in the capitol.

I was stunned when MSNBC on the Katy Tur show had on a woman who covered the RW for them. I don't know the name, but she has nearly white blond hair, She said that Kirk was the most influential Republican other than Trump. The funny thing is that in death, he might be becoming that, which he probably wasn't before death.

Utah Governor Cox soon after the murder said he hoped it wasn't one of them. By any measure, Robinson was one of them, born and bred in Utah, part of the gun culture, and apparently close enough to his conservative, Mormon family that they succeeded in turning himself in.

At least one person in his family said he had a leftish ideology. However, he NEVER voted, no one has described a protest he went to and no one produced any political social media comments. Of Kirk, he spoke just of the hate he spread. Other than his relationship to LBGTQ+ issues, nothing I've read suggests he had any connection to the left.

It seems that Trump and his allies define anyone who is against them on anything as the radical left. Yet, the gun culture he grew up in may have been the the cultural influence most to blame.

[dflprincess]

3. I would rather his name fade away

as it should.

[Jedi Guy]

5. By whom? Because the comparison is wildly inapt.

McCarthyism was the federal government persecuting and hounding people because of suspected ties to Communist organizations or exerting pressure, notably on Hollywood, to blacklist them.

That's a whole different ball of wax from private companies firing people for posting shitty hot takes about Kirk's murder. The fact that it's political speech, otherwise protected by the First Amendment, doesn't mean they can't fire the person who said it.

The First Amendment doesn't shield you from social consequences such as loss of employment with a private company, as a number of people who have engaged in racist outbursts (which is protected speech) in public have learned to their sorrow over the last few years. This really isn't any different, it's private companies choosing not to be associated with viewpoints they feel are controversial enough to impact their ability to make money.

What's going on now is absolutely not comparable to McCarthyism unless/until the federal government starts prosecuting and jailing people because of things they said about Kirk (or some other topic that's clearly protected speech).

People who thought it was cool to express joy over a guy being assassinated are finding out that society feels some type of way about that. Maybe it can be a learning experience for them, though I suspect it won't be judging by the reaction videos I've seen from the ones who got fired.

[Keepthesoulalive]

6. The government threatened their fcc license

[Jedi Guy]

7. Definitely troubling, but I still wouldn't consider a single instance like that to be McCarthyism.

Government overreach, absolutely. McCarthyism? No. McCarthyism was a hell of a lot more widespread and involved than a single instance, so we're not there, at least not yet.

The fact that ABC didn't have the spine to push back despite it being obvious government overreach is frankly bizarre. They should've litigated that all the way to the Supreme Court. The fact that Nexstar and Sinclair, both of which own multiple ABC affiliates, are both currently pursuing business goals which require FCC approval and took action before ABC itself did had a lot to do with the decision, I'm sure, but it's still cowardly.

[Keepthesoulalive]

12. The government should not be threatening business

Unless they are doing something illegal. Something about the first amendment. I know the mouse very well, and like most businesses and Americans they are spineless under the guise of maximum shareholder value. That does not excuse these thugs in ill fitting suits. I know he is from New York but these mafia style tactics do not bode well for our nation.

[boston bean]

18. It is not the only example. Funding to universities if they don't toe the line. Same for media corps. Same for Elon.

Same for lawyers. Same for other companies….., open your mind to the absolute gov’t overreach into our first amendment rights. It is not just companies taking these actions on their own they are being threatened in many ways to take these actions and the threat is from the government.

[karynnj]

19. Colbert was probably fired because Paramount

needed an approval for their merger. So, there is at least a second very prominent example.

These two examples, very close in time, do create a fear that saying anything could lead to the end of their shows. That will likely impact many, possibly freezing dissent.

No two times are identical. Yes, there are differences between the current crackdown and the effects of McCarthyism. Where they are similar is that both included government overreach and both aimed to narrow what was acceptable.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

9. They have said they are going to get the Justice Dept to investigate people.

I can understand shaming people for celebrating a persons death but hiring them or the government investigating them? I believe that many of the people will get new jobs down the road because it’s a dumb reason to fire someone.

[Jedi Guy]

11. They can say whatever they want, I guess.

But they have to back up any legal action with legal doctrine that will pass muster in a courtroom, and the judicial system isn't completely in their pocket. I'll file this one under "Trump admin spouting bullshit again". It's a pretty thick binder, I'll likely have to start a "Volume Two" pretty soon.

As for firing people for celebrating a person's death? I don't know, that seems pretty reasonable to me. Celebrating a person's violent, untimely death because you disagree with their political ideology is, in my opinion, the hallmark of a shitty person. If someone reveals that they are a shitty person, it shouldn't come as a shock when people and employers opt not to associate with them to avoid guilt by association. I have zero sympathy for the people who gleefully celebrated Kirk's assassination.

One young lady posted a gleeful video on TikTok celebrating Kirk's death. She later posted a tearful video sobbing that her friends all abandoned her, unfriended her, etc. as a result. The lack of self-reflection was frankly stunning.

To clarify, there's a difference between not mourning someone's death and celebrating their death. For instance, I don't mourn the death of every famous person, regardless of the manner of death. In many cases I simply have no emotional resonance whatsoever. An absence of feeling is one thing, feeling joy or gladness or whatever is something else entirely, and something shitty to boot.

[Crunchy Frog]

14. I would never celebrate his death, but

Charlie celebrated George Floyd's death, and Paul Pelosi's assault and near death. And he advocated for public executions to be witnessed by children. I wouldn't celebrate his death, but I will say that he was a vile person. And people should be able to point out the things that America's new saint said without getting fired for it. Just as he should have been able to say all the vile things he did without getting shot.

[Jedi Guy]

16. I haven't heard of anyone losing their job simply for quoting Kirk's words or criticizing his views.

The ones I've seen have all gleefully celebrated his assassination. I have nothing but contempt for them and the fact that they're facing consequences for being shitty people isn't going to keep me up at night.

I agree that if they're criticizing his views there shouldn't be repercussions for that. That's entirely different from expressing happiness over his murder. Expressing the belief that he wasn't a good person is also different from being glad he's dead or stating that he deserved what he got.

As I said, though, the ones I've seen went beyond that and I'm by no means intimately familiar with the details of every single one so you've evidently seen something I haven't.

It's a reminder that employers aren't bound by the First Amendment. It seems like a lot of people either forgot that or never knew it to begin with. A lot of people misinterpret the First Amendment to mean they can say whatever they want consequence-free.

[karynnj]

20. Did either Matthew Dowd or Jimmy Kimmel celebrate his death?

I don't think they did. In the case of Dowd, he spoke of Kirk's own comments on gun violence. This was hours after Kirk's murder and the problem was that it could be construed as blaming him for his own murder. Wouldn't having him apologize for saying this when he did be more appropriate.

As to Kimmel, not having watched the clip, it sounds like he was a day or two behind on the "narrative". A few days ago, many were noting that he might have been even farther to the right. ( In fact, I think threats against Kirk before he died made have been almost entirely from the right - Loomer and Fuentes. )

I may have missed something, but I did not see or hear of any celebration. The tone from any people I follow was a rejection of violence and sympathy for his family and a fear that Trump would use this.

[Jedi Guy]

21. Having seen the clip of Dowd's words it absolutely came across as blaming Kirk for his own murder.

Or saying he deserved it, had it coming, however you want to phrase it. I'm not shedding any tears for him. What he said was idiotic and MSNBC decided they didn't want to deal with the fallout, a decision they're fully within their rights to make. No one has a right to be a TV analyst. Dowd opened his mouth and stepped right in on live TV.

I'm not familiar with Kimmel's comments so I can't weigh in on that, but it's 1000% government overreach for the FCC to threaten ABC and demand Kimmel be taken off the air. I just don't think it rises to the level of McCarthyism, which is how I've seen it described elsewhere. To be frank, McCarthyism involves a level of forethought and organization that I just don't believe the Trump administration is capable of. They're a chaotic mess on a good day.

To be clear, no one "of note" (for want of a better term) on the left has openly celebrated Kirk's murder to the best of my knowledge. The people I'm referring to are randos who thought it was a good idea to post their celebrations on TikTok and are now finding out that employers might not want to be associated with such things. Too bad, so sad.

The right has worked overtime to characterize the reaction of "the left" as celebratory, which is wrong. "The left" isn't a monolith any more than "the right" is. It would, however, be accurate to say that some on the left have celebrated Kirk's murder. Human behavior being the outlandish freakshow it usually is, you can almost always find some people in a group engaging in damn near any behavior if you look hard enough. The issue here is no one had to look particularly hard since the smoothbrains blasted their glee onto the internet for all the world to see.

[Crunchy Frog]

13. Jimmy Kimmel was fired because of pressure from the government and government agencies,

as are others, whether or not it's overt. And it isn't just people who "celebrated" his death. It was people who expressed any opinion other than hagiography. It's absolutely comparable to McCarthyism.

I'm surprised to see people on DU who are defending this.

[Jedi Guy]

22. We can agree to disagree, then.

It's 1000% government overreach regarding the FCC's threats against ABC to remove Kimmel. Does it rise to the coordinated onslaught that was McCarthyism? Not as yet, in my opinion. Yours can be different, and that's okay.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

8. No, but people might say "Kimmeled".

Kirk has not earned the grade of becoming a verb.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

10. Not if it's something that is negative.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

15. It's not a negative. It's not his fault he got Kimmeled. Kirked is a negative.

To be Kirked is to be assassinated by internal civil war, red on red violence. For maga, to be Kirked is to be martyred. Not OUR symbology.

To be Kimmeled is to be dropped for totalitarian reasons, to be a victim for the cause of freedom. maga view Kirk that way but, again, their cause is not our cause.

[Jedi Guy]

23. "To be Kirked is to be assassinated by internal civil war, red on red violence."

It's pretty obvious that Kirk wasn't killed in an act of internecine violence on the right. Enough information on Robinson's motivations has come to light to make it clear that he was not acting from animosity that Kirk wasn't conservative enough. He was not a Groyper Nick Fuentes acolyte.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

24. Kirk killed by disaffected right-winger. He may have become socially liberal for love, but no disavowal of tRump. nt

[Jedi Guy]

25. I've seen some mental gymnastics in the last week or so but that's impressive.

Robinson's mother describes her son as having become more sympathetic to LGBTQ issues over the last few years. He was living with and dating a person who is trans and in the process of transitioning. Robinson was described by family members as expressing great dislike for Kirk during a recent family dinner and characterized Kirk as hateful and spreading hate.

Now, that doesn't sound to me like something a right-winger would say. Logic suggests that Robinson, though he came from a MAGA family, fell away from his family and his political views changed. This happens all the time, conservative families have children break liberal or the reverse. No doubt his romantic entanglement with his roommate played some role in that process.

But to suggest that he's a "socially liberal" MAGA openly dating a trans person is ludicrous, full stop. MAGA isn't socially liberal in any sense of the term, the two are incompatible. The roommate was also described by a family member as "hating Christians and conservatives" so it doesn't stand to reason that they would date Robinson if he was still conservative.

And putting the "disavowal of Trump" as a condition on it is equally absurd. People don't write lengthy manifestos just because their political views changed. Their political views just change.

I get the desire to believe that it was internecine violence on the right. It's distressing to accept the idea that someone on the left was capable of such coldblooded violence because of their political views because we're the good guys. But the reality is that people aren't inherently virtuous just because they hold certain views.

You're clinging to denial, to be quite frank.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

26. I'm not clinging to anything. There is no definitive information yet. Sorry to disappoint you. . . . nt