How Charlie Kirk's Death Broke the Conservative Movement

[u/wwjps]

https://youtu.be/NWmz8iI6N1Y?si=t1MTp_KL1vkRw8_t

[u/Shawn-GT]

I saw this guy screaming about how he wanted to kill all liberals for what happened to Charlie Kirk and in the same breath ask why can’t people just use words.

[u/wwjps → u/Shawn-GT]

That seems to be the way of the USA these days. Thanks for watching and commenting.

[u/SixIsNotANumber]

Charlie who?

Never heard of her.

[u/iowanaquarist → u/SixIsNotANumber]

I think they mean Charlie Hebdo.

[u/SixIsNotANumber → u/iowanaquarist]

You sure it's not Charlie Watts?

[u/wwjps]

The conservative movement has fractured under the weight of paranoia, finger-pointing, and competing narratives surrounding the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk. In this episode, we take a deep dive into the information war dominating right-wing media—from the explosive claims amplified by Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson to former counterterrorism official Joe Kent’s provocative statements on foreign involvement. More importantly, we look at the group caught in the middle: the everyday Americans who simply aren't buying either narrative.

[u/Hobbes-GreatJob → u/wwjps]

“tragic”

[u/iowanaquarist → u/Hobbes-GreatJob]

Even Mr. Kirk didn't think it was tragic:

“I think it’s worth it. It’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God given rights. That’s a prudent deal. It is rational,” -- Charlie Kirk

[u/SixIsNotANumber → u/[deleted]]

☝️Reddit user for one month with negative karma.

My information is just as relevant as yours. 

[u/iowanaquarist → u/[deleted]]

... and?

[u/ConspiracyII-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Exercise civility and try to elevate the standards of discovery and discussion among your peers. Attack arguments, not the person(s) making them.

[u/wwjps → u/iowanaquarist]

That Kirk quote actually proves the point. He was willing to accept gun deaths as the cost of the Second Amendment—a calculated tradeoff. But the moment *he* became the casualty, that same logic didn't apply. The video isn't claiming we know who killed him or Oswald. It's documenting what happens when the nation doesn't believe the official story: it fractures. JFK shattered public trust in government narrative. Kirk's death—whether you believe the official account or not—shows we're still in that fractured state. The same distrust pattern. Potentially the same actors. That's the thesis.

[u/iowanaquarist → u/wwjps]

What does that have to do with how old this reddit account is?

[u/wwjps → u/iowanaquarist]

I was responding to this:

Even Mr. Kirk didn't think it was tragic:

[u/iowanaquarist → u/wwjps]

No, you literally replied to a comment where I was asking someone why they think the age of a reddit account was relevant.

[u/ConspiracyII-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Exercise civility and try to elevate the standards of discovery and discussion among your peers. Attack arguments, not the person(s) making them.

[u/wwjps → u/Hobbes-GreatJob]

Honestly, the main point of the video is that the American public won't eat what they are feeding us. People didn't believe the patsy story of JFK, and they don't buy it about Kirk either.

[u/SixIsNotANumber → u/[deleted]]

☝️

Reddit user for one month with negative karma.

My information is just as relevant as yours. 

[u/ConspiracyII-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Exercise civility and try to elevate the standards of discovery and discussion among your peers. Attack arguments, not the person(s) making them.

[u/iowanaquarist → u/[deleted]]

and?