Charule Kirk

Eh, terrorist is a bit of a stretch, that word has a certain definition, definitely a fucking fascist though.

Isn’t “far-right” part of the right wing?

Karma isn’t a thing.

There’s far-left, left, centre-left, centre, centre-right, right, and far-right.

Far- is that which employs violence and suppresses all other opinions given the chance.

Centre is that which is always open for compromise.

The others are not always open for compromise, but discuss with each other in polite atmosphere.

By definition, the far-right necessitates excluding anything less insane than itself.

That said though, in my view the real spectrum is whether someone supports the workers. Be they American, Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Senegalese, Swiss, or whatever else.

“Looks like he took a left-leaning stance in the end after all”

Ever heard of a figure of speech

“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary,”

Marx said in his “Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League.”

It can’t be all of the left making those jokes.

He was a terrorist by definition.

I’m sure those were paid actors in this false flag operation.

Anyone talking about sacrifice never means it for themselves. It’s always someone else getting sacrificed. Of course, sometimes they get to participate anyway.

jokes aren’t okay to only be directed at one side or another. everything is fair game

and objectively, his murder was ironic and with comedic timing, and that’s funny. regardless of it being a horrible event

Some of these jokes go right for the jugular too, neck and neck with other such jokes.

Ahh, nothing as healing as a fascist getting what he fucking deserved. The best of course would’ve been for him to see the error of his ways, and renounce his hatred. But hey, oh well.

Far- is that which employs violence and suppresses all other opinions given the chance.

the “supresses all other opinions given the chance” carries a lot of the weight here, considering that like every statist and really almost everyone agrees with or accepts the employment of violence. really only the minority which is pacifists opposes it, and even pacifists often only oppose violence against humans.

the suppression of all other opinions is then mostly just the destinction between soft and hard power, because ultimately, all who are in power either fight to remain there, or at the very least prevent those who dont share their interests from getting there. the question merely is whether they do this through violence or manipulation, and whether they do it to defend their own freedom or to maintain their domination over others.

i’m sorry if my comment appears antagonistic. my antagonism is (most likely) not directed at you.

i see the distinction between far-x and center as one which is mostly employed to moralize the degree to which people support the status quo, making it in many cases another weapon against dissent, in the arsenal of manipulation tactics. stuff makes me go on frantic rants :3