this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
185 points (93.4% liked)
Bluesky
1631 readers
89 users here now
People skeeting stuff.
Bluesky Social is a microblogging social platform being developed in conjunction with the decentralized AT Protocol. Previously invite-only, the flagship Beta app went public in February 2024. All are welcome!
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It depends on how you define "white supremacy". He definitely held the view that western (white) culture is superior to other cultures. He just also proclaimed that "racism is bad" at the same time, in order to pretend that he was making these points from a reasoned perspective.
Culture has nothing to do with White Supremecy or any other form of racism or "scientific racism". We can indeed have good and bad cultures; this being entirely subjective to individual opinions. Cultures are a social outcome, not a genetic one.
People can "define white Supremecy" however they like, though it's already well defined, so their personal definition may be confusing or discredit any other views they may share.
I don't think Charlie Kirk was a white supremecist at all, but there's many different ways of being a total cunt. At a certain point of cuntiness, it really doesn't matter if he was one or not.
This is literally how dog whistles work, my friend. They don't say what they're saying, out loud. They hide it behind a veneer of rationality, that they think prevents certain people from hearing what they're saying, while throwing a giant wink at the people that "get it".
When a white supremacist talks about "Western culture being superior to other cultures"...they are talking about "white culture".
Yeah, but people that aren't white supremecist also say that. White supremecist from non-westrrn cultures say the same of their culture instead. White supremecist enjoy and emerse themselves into other cultures without it impacting their position of being genetically superior.
What you're trying to explain is called cultural chauvinism and it's as related/unrelated to many other things as it is/isn't to racial ideologies.
No dog whistles here, just already very established and understood stuff.
Plus, it's White Supremecy here. There's so much already there to work with. There's no need to apply assumptions onto it and sell it as a new package.
Nope. Simply not true.
Which would indicate that it IS about white supremacy rather than culture. You're negating your own stupid point.
You're REALLY reaching, buddy..
🙄
Fixed it for you.
A subset of...
Which is not the same as...
Here you go... https://www.routledge.com/Cultural-Chauvinism-Intercultural-Communication-and-the-Politics-of-Superiority/Ibelema/p/book/9780367710033
You would also do well to pay attention to the events of Daryl Davis.
On top of books and many studies on this, there's also documentaries and reports if your attention span so needs this.
Or, you know, it's all bullshit and you know best!
A sponge is wet. The ocean is wet. Therefore sponges are oceans. And saltesc is dumb.
I know that cultural chauvinism exists and what it is.
That doesn't change the fact that Kirk used the language of cultural chauvinism as code for racial chauvinism and that that's exactly what his followers understood it as. AKA a classic dog whistle.
Truest statements from you yet.
So a person that never spoke as or acted as a white supremesist, said they weren't a white supremecist, and very regularly condemned white supremecy and implored for its removal from society, was indeed actually a white supremecist in your mind because...what, you have a hunch? You just prefer it that way for your narrative? It's just totally fine to twist things into other things when it suits what you want?
There are so many things to be said about this piece of shit but you're just not winning hard enough you gotta do exactly what they do. Except I'm sure you think it's okay when you try push misinformation onto others, huh? Because it's either that or you genuinely have no idea what you're talking about, actually believe it, and choose to disregard the put forward to you as hopefully not for realsies, even though a quick search will show you that they are and very abundantly so.
Unless you count the constant dog whistles that you're suspiciously adamant about giving him the benefit of unreasonable doubt on.
So did the KKK until they realized that it was safe to take the hood off.
Yeah, I very much doubt it. I'm gonna need at least one example.
Yes, he was.
Nope, because of his constant white supremacy apologia poorly disguised as "defending Western culture".
Did you get distracted and start talking to yourself or are you REALLY unaware that you're projecting more than a whole cinema
True.
Nonsense. Calling a racist a racist is exactly what the fascists DON'T do.
Nope. That's why I don't do that.
This you?
collapsed inline media
https://oxford-review.com/the-oxford-review-dei-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-dictionary/cultural-racism-definition-and-explanation/#%3A%7E%3Atext=Cultural+racism+refers+to+the%2Cvery+fabric+of+societal+culture.
It has nothing to do with culture but they hate multiculturalism... Use that heavy thing above your shoulders bud.
That's not true at all. Some do, plenty don't. Multiculturalism is unrelated.
https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1931897306166763631
Ya huh, keep telling yourself that.
What's your point?
It's okay to redefine what White Supremecy is just so we get to call someone one?
This is cultural chauvinism or cultural imperialism; it is not white supremecy or any racial superiority ideology for that matter. These are two different, well-defined, and bad things. You don't have to try force them together to make a bad thing. It's already done. You win. Being either one or both is bad.
But it's not exactly good to shift the goal posts to try frame a person you didn not like into being something you want them to be but cannot confirm that they were. That's my point.
We don't need to, we're talking about him and he's a white supremacist.
Delusional, discredited.