I had exactly the same thought - that the Kirk' killing was the straw that broke the polarized camel's back, a tipping point the fascists will use as a justification and a rallying cry for anything and everything they will now do to finish off Murica's sham democracy. Charlie the martyr.
One other thing: Charlie is being lionised for "conducting politics the right way." In one very limited sense he did; he went out and spoke to people. But that's it. He also debated almost entirely in bad faith, using every rhetorical trick in the book - but particularly false premises and switching goalposts - in an attempt to belittle those he "debated."
He clearly had no interest in learning new perspectives, changing or even slightly modifying his views when presented with contradictory evidence or superior arguments, nor striving to find a middle ground. He debated FOR SHOW and to "win", not to learn or include or find concensus.
I'm with you. I'm not sure that showing up IRL to campuses is something to be applauded. I, somewhat cynically, imagine he saw it opportunistically - he's great at rhetoric and debate and strawmannirg (as you say) and figured it was a great technique to get at the Left. It's not as though he was conducting fireside chats where he was listening.
Turning Point USA does appearances at Campuses because college students are their target demographic. They are an outreach program as much as anything. They are targeting current voters who are also potential future leaders.
His whole ploy was calculated , he turned up to campus or street side because he knew he would get a bite. He was a troll IRL , the only thing you could commend is he had the balls to take it from behind the screen. The rest is just evil, like his wife’s gaze and words. #Ubernaziwife
I can see a little bit of this in his work, but it is predominantly a common political or ideological ploy.
Get people to start rebelling against the current system while spouting a utopian past (which was not utopian it was oppressive) though the current system is also an over compensation against the old).
The right is correct in that government has become blotted and the left ideology has gone too far. While what is also true is that government has become immensely corrupt and owned by the billionaires.
Trump and Kirk and the far right Christian power base is the typical response to that imbalance. They see an opportunity and seize it. Through subtle manipulation and fanning of hatred.
The human population has become highly dysregulated due to the stress of the current state of society and the planet. And is falling into left brain / ego driven ideology and concrete thinking. We need to calm the farm and watch out for the snakes like Charlie and Trump who are driving the fear and hate.
Yeah, and you know, this is why so many people stopped listening to mainstream liberal news a long time ago here. There's been a steady dropping away since 2016, since the NYTimes, WashPost, etc platformed Trump to profit, while simultaneously dismissing him as too uncouth to be a real threat. They're applauding manners above all else still. Reality-averse.
A friend of mine commented in his legendary brevity: "The Horst Wessel of the US. Next exit: Reichstagsbrand."
It is just so excruciating to observe how the US are ticking one box after the other on the road to fascism. In the same order as 95 years ago in Germany. From this point of view, to me this is more than that undefined feeling Sarah describes: It's just the next step in a chain of events we can easily extrapolate.
Back then, we Germans luckily lost by some margin - but at what expense of human lifes and unprecedented crimes against humanity? It's so dark. We will now inevitably find out what we would have done in our grandparents shoes.
Maybe this substack shows feasible ways. However, one correction to that: Poland did manage to get rid of a (proto)fascist government after it got elected.
As far as the differing opinions on Charlie Kirk I will firstly say I hadn't heard about him until his death. I watched with fascination the very varied opinions on who he was, some loved him some disliked him. What I've seen in my feed the last few days, shows the opposite of what you were saying.
A friend shared a screenshot to FB just now which I think might go along way to explaining this division in who he was. What she shared, it was basically saying people are being fed through the algorithms two different versions. Which was this
"One thing that has become really clear is that we live in at least two different realities. Talking to a friend who only knew Charlie as a Christian motivational speaker because that's all that ever came across her feed. Showed me videos I've never seen before of him saying perfectly reasonable and empowering things.
I showed her videos she'd never seen before of his racism, misogyny, homophobia, advocating for violence against specific groups of people. She was horrified by his remarks about Pelosi's husband's attacker being bailed out and celebrated for his violent act. She was horrified by a number of things that he said, but she had never seen or heard them before, the same as I had never seen or heard the generalized clips of him sounding like a perfectly nice loving man and father.
My thoughts are, we are potentially being manipulated by what shows up in our feed based on what we're looking for perhaps 🤔
I also feel this great division on opinions relating to various events has become more amplified over the last 5 years or so (when I first noticed it could be longer) and I feel it is spiritual.
Dee, thanks for confirming what we are all starting to realise here. Clearly we are seeing different versions. I have been reading some commentary, too, that Charlie and his people KNEW this and really worked the algorithms to create these two lenses.
The videos you mention of racism, misogny etc I am deeply curious to see as I too have never seen them before? Can you give us any links? I want to see the full picture that others appear to be seeing.
Great post today. I often reference the assassination of Franz Ferdinand as a catalytic event. It's crazy to feel like we are here to bear witness, whilst it unravels.
I like you take on this through a collapse lens Sarah, this could be a trigger moment...planned or opportune by those who want chaos , distraction and for us to be fighting each other.
On my weekly Book Chat with Zahra @collapse life we are talking about the book The Preparation , which is written to guide young men to becoming dependable , adults of good character in uncertain futures.
The emphasis in the book is on the individual, becoming a "renaissance man", (very white European orientated ). But it is our collective morality and how we live with each other that is being called for in this moment.
It was published in 2025 Sarah, it came out a month or so ago..We will be talking about the moral eduction of young men on the Thursday LIVE. Can’t think of a better time 🤔 or more relevant subject .
Sorry to read that one or two subscribers are off...I can't think of a more important time for us all to be listening to each other's take, fears, and the bigger collapse story. I was aware when I woke this morning of such heaviness within me: several days of watching social media further polarise, and behind so many of the posts real pain (irrespective of which 'side' of the divide they came from.) My 'take' is that many many of us are hurting; and beneath the rage and recriminations many of us are scared. It feels like now more than ever we're required to be with the discomfort, look past all those millions of words to people's hearts. Thanks as always Sarah for providing a space to do those things.
I have read two other articles today, an interview and a substack comment.
The interview was in the German SPIEGEL ONLINE, with a culture scientist, on how the digital world we live in has played a big part in that shooting last week and also how precise Kirk used digital tools to troll, to divide and to hit.
"Kirk offered digital formats offline and then digitally reused to achieve a mass impact. The idea behind this is that you first have to change the culture before you change politics. And in our societies today, culture is changed by normalizing radical ideas and mobilizing people through digital formats. Through formats that are controversial and sensationalism that circulates viral and thus spread as memes. Such memes have been an established means of political communication since Trump's presidential campaign in 2015/16 at the latest."
Yes. Here's a browser generated translation of that part:
"Maly: To say that he argued that he argued that freedom of expression is at best a very naive view of things. The whole talk about freedom of expression is a classic narrative of the right: they are concerned with normalizing radical ideas and pushing the boundaries of the saying to the right. And Kirk was also about it. The method he used for this was that of a troll in political discourse.
SPIEGEL: Trolls are called users on the Internet, who disturb discussions, deliberately provoke and sabotage discourses. Kirk transferred this pattern into the political debate?
Maly: Yes, you could this strategy since Trump's Presidential candidate 2015/16. Kirk's university tours were essential to use these Troll methods, because it allows attention to be paid. He offered a live format that was created online: "Ask me anything", the students should be able to ask him everything. However, it was not about an open exchange, but about provoking as much as possible with other opinions, so that they become angry.
SPIEGEL: The rhetorically trained Kirk remained cool, while inexperienced students were talking in Rage.
Maly: All of this was filmed. And passages in which Kirk's opponents acted clumsily were spread as memes online. Many videos that circulated this way were small troll campaigns to portray political opponents as radical idiots and himself as the voice of reason. It was not about understanding with the other political side, he was concerned with fomenting controversy and attracting attention to his concerns. Because with controversy you reach people, can move them to interact: users assign likes for the videos or get upset about it. In both cases, however, Kirk gained visibility – and thus spread his positions. Kirk led a culture warfare, he was concerned with normalizing the right-wing extremist discourse.
What discussions did Charlie disturb? People came and spoke to him at their own will. Either because they had a message to share, wanted to learn, wanted to be seen, or wanted to troll him.
I would not go as far as quitting social platforms ( I am using some for good and productive things) - I find it more important to teach people/students media competence and critical thinking.
Cal Newport wrote the book 'Digital Minimalism' and is a Computer Science Professor, for context to the link I shared.
Leaving social media was the most incredible thing for my creativity, productivity, general wellbeing and overall zest for life. Perhaps my Journalism & Politics degree gave me the tools to see what 'social media' was going to be used for? One unit I studied comes to mind straight away, 'Persuasion, Propaganda and Marketing'. I agree, everyone should be taught those skills at a very young age. Maybe they too will avoid social media like the plague.
Edit to add: I am obviously still using Substack, which I'd also classify as social media. But I left the other platforms years ago now.
I won't deny that there are days when I wish we'd never opened that Pandora's Box (I'm born in the early 60s) and when I ask myself if I should rather move to Kangaroo Island and go offline.
But there is still a tiny, tiny spark of hope that the positive part of Social Media will survive. Until then I at least try to minimise the time I spend there (I am not using X or Tiktok - shows my age). But we can't deny that SM is now a big part of life and I'm not sure if not watching what's happening is the solution. More food for thought.
It is time for me to unfollow Sarah's substack, sadly. This take appears lazily researched, and hastily written to support a narrative that serves nothing but Sarah's ego.
We don't know who Erika was referring to when she said "they". I didn't immediately take "they" to be the left. I feel as though something will come out about co conspirators but the simple fact is we don't know so why publish it as fact?
Charlie never promoted violence, racism, or targeted attacks against anyone. I challenge anyone to find one example where he does.
To end, Sarah has only shared part of Charlie's quote about empathy. I would encourage anyone reading to research the full quote and context in which he said SYMPATHY IS A BETTER WORD. This was part of a broader conversation.
Hi Emma, I'm sorry you feel this way. I assure you my post was not lazily researched or hastily written. It took a lot of work. I strongly disagree with you - there are countless examples where he has promoted violence, racism etc.
In a June 2024 podcast, he invoked Leviticus 18’s verse about stoning in the Bible when responding to someone who wished LGBTQ+ people a “Happy Pride,” saying “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.” He unashamedly championed murdering thousands of Palestinians to achieve Israel’s “freedom”. He said that black women had small brains, that women should “submit to their husbands”, and that child victims of rape should not be allowed abortions (did you see the video where he said - hypothetically - that he'd make his 10 yo daughter give birth to a baby conceived by rape? I made my statements based on these beliefs that he promotes regularly.
Regarding the empathy line clarification - yes, I'm aware of it. But there is a massive difference IMO btw the two sentiments.
You seem to be a defender or perhaps supporter of Kirk. I ask in genuine good faith, what was it that you felt he offered? What am I missing?
Emma, I'll also just add - and I think this is important - my aim with my post wasn't to focus on Kirk and what he did or didn't say, per se. It was to argue that his death is now being weaponised and signifies a potent "spark"
I think you are taking a lot of this out of context, Sarah, and have fallen to the algorithms you are being fed. Many of his quotes are being shared in a way that is completely out of context. Even his idea of marital submission. Maybe he has different views to you - like about when life starts and when it is ok to end it and biblical marriage - but can't you accept you have different spiritual world views? Why do you have to respond with so much agression and hate? He may have been strong in his views, but it was never delivered with the agressive tone echoed in your writing here.
Hi Sarah. I am more than happy to respond with my own thoughts to each of your points but I will start by sharing my introduction to Charlie.
A video of Charlie showed up on my YouTube algorithm in which he and an individual were debating abortion rights.
The reason, perhaps, that Charlie showed up on my YouTube algorithm is because I had been following Brett Cooper but aside from that my Youtube consumption mainly consisted of tutorials, author vlogs and fitness routines - that is to say, far from political.
I saw a short video in which Charlie was asked if he would make his theoretical 10 year old child give birth (noting, I hope you can understand that I don't want to continue sharing the extremely graphic situation he was asked to provide a response to) as an outcome of an extreme act of violence.
Charlie provided a response - seemingly condeming the graphic and horrific question, no doubt in part because he is a father of a baby and a toddler - and then went on to answer the difficult question posed to him bravely and without waiving his moral conviction.
This is obviously not a direct quote but he said that science proves, and his Christian values state, that life begins at conception. He would not make the baby conceived suffer. He would not respond to tragedy with further tragedy. He would not teach his children to respond to tragedy with tragedy.
I took personal issue with this and showed someone else who, to my amazement, disagreed with me. They asked me, why if i so strongly believe in the human right to life, do I make exceptions for defenceless unborn children based on the circumstances of their conception? I responded to say that because the 10 year olds life was worth more. They asked me why I got to determine the value of one person's life over another in a situation where the two could live without one's heartbeat forcibly being stopped. Where, depending on the stage of the pregnancy, both could live and breath without the baby's limbs being ripped from them inside utero.
I obviously had a lot to think about and decided to watch several of Charlie's videos in full about abortion.
That is how I came to realise how inhumane abortion is and how as a society we have lost our way for continuing to normalise it and speak out against those who speak up for the defenceless.
That is how I came to understand the importance of growing my mindset, questioning everything, and understanding my core values.
Recently a video was shared by Erika of Charlie interacting with their daughter. Anyone can see how much love he has for that little girl and I am in awe of him for putting his life on the line to encourage civil discourse over civil war amongst other things despite how much he and his family had to lose by him being murdered.
Hi Emma - just curious. Have you ever had an abortion? Or been in a situation where you have had to make a decision like this? I have. My husband and I have. We chose to end a pregnancy at 24 weeks because our doctor told us that our daughter (who has already slowed in growth) would mostly like be born at 25/26 week mark and be in the NICU for months with no guarantee of her condition of life (sight, hearing, organ survival brain development). I chose to give birth to her despite knowing all of this and if I could I would it a million times more. She was stillborn and I held her and let her know how much she was wanted and loved. It was the one of the hardest things I have ever had to do but it made me even more aware of the importance of choice for women and their children. We are obviously going to disagree on this issue but unless you have stood in my position, you cannot truly understand. I will always stand up for women and their bodies. Do I think abortion should be utilized as some sort of answer to birth control? Not at all. But it is promoted as such by some outlets which ignores the many other complex stories and situations that parents face on a daily basis. Sorry to capture this one issue but when I see people try to push this narrative as a one size fits all, I can't let it slide.
I believe the right to life applies to all humans. I previously felt that it was the woman's right to choose however cannot uphold this inate human right without believing this. That is my personal conviction.
To say he never promoted violence is laughable, promoting gun ownership and suggesting human deaths warrant that right, is in of itself violent. No matter where you stand the death of a human through means of a gun shot is a violent act. There are also countless examples of him being racist, misogynistic, homophobic, etc the list goes on. As for targeted attacks, how is Kirk’s Turning Point USA “Professor Watchlist” not targeted? I think the importance of this article is to take a step back from the back and forth narrative and to see how this interplays with the wider picture. It's a different perspective.
Charlie was likening the ownership of cars and the amount of vehicle related deaths to the ownership of guns and the amount of gun related deaths.
He advocated for armed guards outside of schools to protect children just as there are armed guards at baseball fields.
He argued that taking away ALL legal gun ownership meant that law abiding citizens wouldn't have a means to protect themselves against illegally owned firearms as well as tyrannical governments.
As for the professor watch list. Have you been through the list? One professor was found to be running a personal blog in which he praises terrorism in America. Another one was found to be promoting and facilitating marriages and "consumation" between students and planetary objects like the ocean.
If someone in Australia started a website exposing teachers of highly prestigious and highly paid schools for promoting terrorism and... whatever the other thing is ... 60 Minutes and ACA would be in a bidding war over it and we'd see a higher registration of trade apprenticeships.
Charlie saw from the age of 18, if not earlier, how much debt people were getting into for an education that did not serve them and so started Turning Point USA to offer people the chance to listen and explore why conventional pathways such as being in student debt might not be for everyone.
Violence is not just about threats of physical harm. There are countless examples of Charlie Kirk being racist, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic... how is this not violent?
I kind of feel something underneath all of the noise and the hate and the concerted attempt by the economic powers that be to distance people from a sense of their own humanity. My heart has been breaking for Tyler Robinson and the fear he must have in this time. My heart breaks for Kirk's wife and how her greif has been exploited and radicalized by her political community. For me, walking in the future requires steadfastness and calm, but also that the chaos issues a powerful invitation to see through the hate. Systems and institutions that have become unmoored and are unspooling into the complex array of compounding collapses require me to notice where the light is instead of bracing to be hit by rubble, if that makes any sense -- I have a felt sense of it in my body and it's hard to put words to. I'm not trying to bypass grief about it all, but root myself so deeply in the goodness and gift of my life that I find the light and peace I long for within me. Life isn't so much about reacting to things but living out of a life-force whose umbilical connection to Spirit gives me the inner strength to feel all the heartbreak, love my enemies, and wrap this astonishing world in prayerful love. Edited to add: this also doesn't mean that I look past naming what is hateful and unjust -- but that its power over me to shape my behaviour and how I relate to the world is far weaker than the inner fidelity to seek grace. Or, as Micah put it, to walk humbly, act justly, and love mercy.
I am feeling the same kind of impetus to really ground down into all the humane principles in my being. As I say, understanding the forces at play and the historical contexts allow me to view things from a good distance and to allow for the fact "all those people" haven't suddenly turned evil.
Thank you Sarah for you thought provoking piece. As always I felt you provided a balanced, wide lense approach to this unfolding moment. Sadly many people were murdered on that day in the USA and I feel immense sadness for CK’s loved ones.
For those in the comment section who are analysing the micro details on your article to find parts that align or don’t alone with their view - why are you doing that? As I step back and look at this, I ask myself, where do my values intersect and how does this impact my life? Is this just another example of senseless gun violence in the USA?
I am troubled by the notion that history is repeating itself and I’m watching it play out in real time on social media, displayed via someone else’s value lense and commentary. Everyone wants to rubber stamp this moment in time with their opinion. When we all know the truth has many layers and takes years to document and analysis. Why CK was killed and how will be just another JFK moment in the future.
In a fast paced world where news is spewed forth with hyped up click bait and has global consequences, as all develop nations has full time staff and departments analysing every article entering it into AI for analysis. Each article and their responses are being watched very closely by the big tech bros.
Sarah makes a valid point - is this the spark that sets off a chain of events the ‘speeds up’ the collapse of global stability?
We are all standing on the edge of a mountain, feeling the ground slip beneath our feet but the landslide hasn’t gathered momentum - yet. We all know it’s coming… if it’s not the assassination of CK or a genocide, or Russian drones in NATO air space what will it be? I see this as yet another marker on a road of collapse and its jangled my nerves to the point that I’m ramping up my preparations for a simplification of our global supply chains and infrastructure. As a mother hen, I’m gathering my chicks and building a nest of stability and warmth for my family and community. May CK’s family have the same privacy to create a place of refuge and protection. In the end, that is all that matters.
It is interesting, and perhaps worrying, how some readers here have chosen to quibble over small details about CK, which I clearly state is not the point I'm focusing on. In fact, the opposite. My point is, it doesn't really matter who CK is and exactly what he said, nor who Tyler was or was not dating or whether Mormonism is Christian, it's how this moment is being weaponised that is salient.
You introduce your article with assertions about Charlie Kirk that are obviously not well informed. If the introduction is so misguided, it's difficult to read on and give credibility to any following points that you say you are focusing on.
Making inaccurate comments about someone’s statements should not be brushed off as “small points”. A writer acting genuinely feels a responsibility to seek the truth in what they share.
It seems like you’re acting to create more hate and division, rather than to bring people together in understanding.
The vast majority of people I speak with (in Australia) had no idea who CK was and understand that his death is being ‘used’ for propaganda. Thank you for adding your voice and allowing my comments to feed back into the machines of AI. The landslide of total collapse is picking up pace.
Oh jeeez 🤦🏻♂️ I hope everyone is having a good weekend
I made a note during the week and wanted to share it Sarah , some ideas for the book or possibly in the discussions around upon release
I see a need for a way to better understand our response to stress and upheaval. So that we walk the future with grace
Sarah
A few musings for the book in response to recent posts
A pictogram of the movement of power between the collective and the individual across the centuries
Within individuals , couples , families, communities, countries and empires
The fundamental reasons for the shift in each occasion , the emotions and behaviour driving it
When a society becomes to narcissi and Individualistic the environment and the connections die
When overly connected the individual dies and the environment stagnates and is unresponsive , while engulfed by the masses
What is it in the human race that causes us to lock down into a self destructive spiral of closed mindedness? Of religion or ideology which hijacks our inner wisdom and actual emotions?
I have been reading a lot about the phenomenon lately , how chronic high stress pushes an individual into cults, ideologies or their own ego structure. We are seeing this on an unprecedented global level. Where scared, dysregulated people turn up to UQ in Brisbane to morn Charlie Kirk? Or the comments within your Substack.
How does society recognise the risk of this imbalance and have it at the forefront of our politics and civil works?
How do we catch these over compensations so that we avoid utter destruction?
Rumination is disassociation, if it is regarding a personal issue or a global calamity. And from that place nothing good comes.
It means that you are not living in reality , instead you are living in a disembodied ego created semi conscious state
Someone in balance looks like they are in balance , if they are not looking that way they are not , how do we teach our kids and even the grown ups to see this in plain sight
Part of the way forward is a better understanding of ourselves and then each other , which is a theme in the book. But maybe an avenue to focus on as it is gives a very practical here and now solution on how to cope. And also how to proceed in the future
I hear you Steve...the collapse book just didn't have a FULL scope to cover off the "what now" element. The scope was to really get people solidly collapse aware and to start their own journey. And to maybe establish the leaders who will need to provide guidance. This is partly uncharted territory. The missing bit, of course, is the moral institutions that used to exist to guide us - churches, philosophers, etc. In the vacuum left behind, the Turning Points of the world step in. I think there is much to learn from what these kind of groups are doing...
It will make for good conversation in the discussions that follows the book though
And yes , the vacuum is vast. I was speaking to one of the guys at work re climate change (did you see the Aussie report on how fucked we are?). He asked if I believe in it.
I just asked him, do you see that the climate is changing rapidly? Do you think that there is a chance we are causing some of it? Either way we can both agree that the world we know is over. And we need to work together to figure out how to adapt rapidly or to fix it. It simplified it for him and he agreed. It did not bring the answers. But like your book it stops the stuffing around and gets to the point. We are fucked 😅
Once I grow a set of balls I will write more and talk more. Thinking of an Alan Jones style Tik Tok where chicks can call in and complain about boys and other fucked up things 😅
I agree Sarah, I felt the temperature change. Such a perfect match to light. Are you aware of the shooters lover? It adds gasoline to the fire. He has or had a gay lover who is transitioning to female. Either way you spin it , it just fans the flames.
Was he radicalised by a trans/left/demon? Was he an insider within the right who just sees that their particular brand of power is about to be lost to the fascist majority (ie angry young men and women). Such foder for a million different spins of bullshit.
Plays further into the fevered grounds of destructive ideology and the mental health crisis (social justice, trans, radical feminism, fascism, men’s rights, white power, white shame and victimhood).
Where internalised shame or panic (men’s abusive of power, homosexuality, women’s powerlessness, over achieving or narcissism, environmental and social degradation) is dealt with my massive ego and group identification
The lover detail - yes, I've read these details. But it's another distracting detail. It makes no difference who his lover was. The only bit of interest there is the confession, which I'm sure you agree with. I marvel, as you might too, how many layers of complex "clusterfuckery" this issue has to it...but then...hey, this is collapse !
This perfectly timed tragedy of modern ‘biblical’ proportions is right out of the Rene Girard mimetic playbook (Peter Thiel) with Trump, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and a host of characters scapegoating anyone who is not lock-stock in sync with the politics of Mr Kirk as you describe so well 😳
Also, your comments appear to scoff at the fact Erika participated in a public message about the death of her husband. Charlie had a large following, lots of supporters a network of employees, colleagues, mentees, a church group, etc... not to mention the people at the event also shattered and impacted. She was well within her right to address whoever she damn well pleased.
I can see how my comments might appear to be scoffing of the scale and import attached to Erika's press conference. But, again, however, the main point I was making was that Erika knew he was shot by one young guy AND there was no evidence he was from the Left or that it was a targeted attack on Kirk's mission. I very much found her comments to be jumping to conclusions that had in part been contradicted, and I found them to be dangerous and frightening in the way they point to retribution against some force "out there", as opposed to a lone 22 yo kid.
What exact conclusions were made in her video? What "force" was referenced? She thanked law enforcement for apprehending the murder.
I believe Erika deserves some grace and for her comments not to be picked apart by someone trying to beef up their substack piece. Her husband, and father of her two children, was just murdered aged 31. She has a daughter at home grieving for their dad who was their whole world.
Hi other Emma, you are entitled to your opinions. When I witnessed her press conference, I saw hatred and rage as well as grief. It frightened me. It was like she was calling for war (well she was, but against whom?) I could not help but contrast this with the grace and dignity of Jacqueline Kennedy, or even the words of Rosie Batty after the loss of her son Luke. Each woman is entitled to react however she so chooses during the most confronting and horrific moment of her life. But the difference is stark and utterly revealing. To anyone else here commenting that that man was taken out of context and was not a racist, misogynistic, toxic weapon of mass disinformation, I have nothing for you. To not see it is to be beyond rational debate.
Why is it so hard to believe that her missions was/is to honour him and pay tribute to not only her husband but also the work he did and the countless others involved in that work.
The most reasonable, fair and compassionate interpretation is that this is a grieving woman with a deeply personal expression of grief and love for herself husband whose work she wants to continue to honour as do many. Assuming motive risks unfairly politicising her grief, something I don't believe you are entitled to do. Even though this relationship and family dynamic is something that is severly rare in today's society - which is in my mind probably what is so wrong with the world - I hope you can look past your own biases and have some respect for a mother who has just lost the father of her children.
I had exactly the same thought - that the Kirk' killing was the straw that broke the polarized camel's back, a tipping point the fascists will use as a justification and a rallying cry for anything and everything they will now do to finish off Murica's sham democracy. Charlie the martyr.
One other thing: Charlie is being lionised for "conducting politics the right way." In one very limited sense he did; he went out and spoke to people. But that's it. He also debated almost entirely in bad faith, using every rhetorical trick in the book - but particularly false premises and switching goalposts - in an attempt to belittle those he "debated."
He clearly had no interest in learning new perspectives, changing or even slightly modifying his views when presented with contradictory evidence or superior arguments, nor striving to find a middle ground. He debated FOR SHOW and to "win", not to learn or include or find concensus.
I'm with you. I'm not sure that showing up IRL to campuses is something to be applauded. I, somewhat cynically, imagine he saw it opportunistically - he's great at rhetoric and debate and strawmannirg (as you say) and figured it was a great technique to get at the Left. It's not as though he was conducting fireside chats where he was listening.
Turning Point USA does appearances at Campuses because college students are their target demographic. They are an outreach program as much as anything. They are targeting current voters who are also potential future leaders.
He did a podcast with Jordan Peterson in April, Jordan asked him how he got into it.
His whole ploy was calculated , he turned up to campus or street side because he knew he would get a bite. He was a troll IRL , the only thing you could commend is he had the balls to take it from behind the screen. The rest is just evil, like his wife’s gaze and words. #Ubernaziwife
Or, hear me out ... Charlie's organisation influenced people to learn how to be thinkers as opposed to workers.
I can see a little bit of this in his work, but it is predominantly a common political or ideological ploy.
Get people to start rebelling against the current system while spouting a utopian past (which was not utopian it was oppressive) though the current system is also an over compensation against the old).
The right is correct in that government has become blotted and the left ideology has gone too far. While what is also true is that government has become immensely corrupt and owned by the billionaires.
Trump and Kirk and the far right Christian power base is the typical response to that imbalance. They see an opportunity and seize it. Through subtle manipulation and fanning of hatred.
The human population has become highly dysregulated due to the stress of the current state of society and the planet. And is falling into left brain / ego driven ideology and concrete thinking. We need to calm the farm and watch out for the snakes like Charlie and Trump who are driving the fear and hate.
Yeah, and you know, this is why so many people stopped listening to mainstream liberal news a long time ago here. There's been a steady dropping away since 2016, since the NYTimes, WashPost, etc platformed Trump to profit, while simultaneously dismissing him as too uncouth to be a real threat. They're applauding manners above all else still. Reality-averse.
A friend of mine commented in his legendary brevity: "The Horst Wessel of the US. Next exit: Reichstagsbrand."
It is just so excruciating to observe how the US are ticking one box after the other on the road to fascism. In the same order as 95 years ago in Germany. From this point of view, to me this is more than that undefined feeling Sarah describes: It's just the next step in a chain of events we can easily extrapolate.
Back then, we Germans luckily lost by some margin - but at what expense of human lifes and unprecedented crimes against humanity? It's so dark. We will now inevitably find out what we would have done in our grandparents shoes.
And each step hypernomalises the situation, enabling the next step...
Maybe this substack shows feasible ways. However, one correction to that: Poland did manage to get rid of a (proto)fascist government after it got elected.
https://open.substack.com/pub/cmarmitage/p/i-researched-every-attempt-to-stop?r=1sjttq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
EXACTLY what I've been thinking. All of a sudden no one remembers the Epstein files and all it took was this Reichstag moment.
As far as the differing opinions on Charlie Kirk I will firstly say I hadn't heard about him until his death. I watched with fascination the very varied opinions on who he was, some loved him some disliked him. What I've seen in my feed the last few days, shows the opposite of what you were saying.
A friend shared a screenshot to FB just now which I think might go along way to explaining this division in who he was. What she shared, it was basically saying people are being fed through the algorithms two different versions. Which was this
"One thing that has become really clear is that we live in at least two different realities. Talking to a friend who only knew Charlie as a Christian motivational speaker because that's all that ever came across her feed. Showed me videos I've never seen before of him saying perfectly reasonable and empowering things.
I showed her videos she'd never seen before of his racism, misogyny, homophobia, advocating for violence against specific groups of people. She was horrified by his remarks about Pelosi's husband's attacker being bailed out and celebrated for his violent act. She was horrified by a number of things that he said, but she had never seen or heard them before, the same as I had never seen or heard the generalized clips of him sounding like a perfectly nice loving man and father.
My thoughts are, we are potentially being manipulated by what shows up in our feed based on what we're looking for perhaps 🤔
I also feel this great division on opinions relating to various events has become more amplified over the last 5 years or so (when I first noticed it could be longer) and I feel it is spiritual.
Dee, thanks for confirming what we are all starting to realise here. Clearly we are seeing different versions. I have been reading some commentary, too, that Charlie and his people KNEW this and really worked the algorithms to create these two lenses.
The videos you mention of racism, misogny etc I am deeply curious to see as I too have never seen them before? Can you give us any links? I want to see the full picture that others appear to be seeing.
Great post today. I often reference the assassination of Franz Ferdinand as a catalytic event. It's crazy to feel like we are here to bear witness, whilst it unravels.
I like you take on this through a collapse lens Sarah, this could be a trigger moment...planned or opportune by those who want chaos , distraction and for us to be fighting each other.
On my weekly Book Chat with Zahra @collapse life we are talking about the book The Preparation , which is written to guide young men to becoming dependable , adults of good character in uncertain futures.
The emphasis in the book is on the individual, becoming a "renaissance man", (very white European orientated ). But it is our collective morality and how we live with each other that is being called for in this moment.
I really resonated with this short clip, if you haven't heard it already and I appreciate the Palestinian reference to being Steadfast, because they know all about that. ..https://substack.com/@jonathancook/note/c-155950324?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=a9nqc
When was the book written, Susan?
It was published in 2025 Sarah, it came out a month or so ago..We will be talking about the moral eduction of young men on the Thursday LIVE. Can’t think of a better time 🤔 or more relevant subject .
Gosh...I'll try tune in. Will you do a post on the actual "tips" the book espouses.
That would be wonderful Sarah 🙏🏻 Yes, I will do a summary Post from our talk and the tips from the book, I am going to focus in on them ..
This is the summary on Integrity and Morality prompted by The Preparation Book.
Name your values, write your code, align your actions.
https://open.substack.com/pub/courageousconversation/p/strengthen-your-internal-gps-for?r=a9nqc&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
I just found what I think is the associated Substack.
https://www.thepreparation.com/
That is the book, thank you I didn’t know it had its own substack !
Do come along to the Live and join in 🙏🏻
Sorry to read that one or two subscribers are off...I can't think of a more important time for us all to be listening to each other's take, fears, and the bigger collapse story. I was aware when I woke this morning of such heaviness within me: several days of watching social media further polarise, and behind so many of the posts real pain (irrespective of which 'side' of the divide they came from.) My 'take' is that many many of us are hurting; and beneath the rage and recriminations many of us are scared. It feels like now more than ever we're required to be with the discomfort, look past all those millions of words to people's hearts. Thanks as always Sarah for providing a space to do those things.
I really do feel Charlie et al are feeling as scared as we are...
I have read two other articles today, an interview and a substack comment.
The interview was in the German SPIEGEL ONLINE, with a culture scientist, on how the digital world we live in has played a big part in that shooting last week and also how precise Kirk used digital tools to troll, to divide and to hit.
"Kirk offered digital formats offline and then digitally reused to achieve a mass impact. The idea behind this is that you first have to change the culture before you change politics. And in our societies today, culture is changed by normalizing radical ideas and mobilizing people through digital formats. Through formats that are controversial and sensationalism that circulates viral and thus spread as memes. Such memes have been an established means of political communication since Trump's presidential campaign in 2015/16 at the latest."
The original article is in German, sorry.
https://archive.md/gMouA
The other one was a substack by Christopher Armitage about how to stop facists after they came into office. Or if it's even possible.
"Once fascists win power democratically, they have never been removed democratically. Not once. Ever."
https://substack.com/home/post/p-170847027
Those two and your text today will give me plenty of food for thought over the next days I guess. Crazy times.
I read that one about fascists not being able to be stopped.
Is the German article referring to the memes created out those Campus Clash set-ups he did?
Yes. Here's a browser generated translation of that part:
"Maly: To say that he argued that he argued that freedom of expression is at best a very naive view of things. The whole talk about freedom of expression is a classic narrative of the right: they are concerned with normalizing radical ideas and pushing the boundaries of the saying to the right. And Kirk was also about it. The method he used for this was that of a troll in political discourse.
SPIEGEL: Trolls are called users on the Internet, who disturb discussions, deliberately provoke and sabotage discourses. Kirk transferred this pattern into the political debate?
Maly: Yes, you could this strategy since Trump's Presidential candidate 2015/16. Kirk's university tours were essential to use these Troll methods, because it allows attention to be paid. He offered a live format that was created online: "Ask me anything", the students should be able to ask him everything. However, it was not about an open exchange, but about provoking as much as possible with other opinions, so that they become angry.
SPIEGEL: The rhetorically trained Kirk remained cool, while inexperienced students were talking in Rage.
Maly: All of this was filmed. And passages in which Kirk's opponents acted clumsily were spread as memes online. Many videos that circulated this way were small troll campaigns to portray political opponents as radical idiots and himself as the voice of reason. It was not about understanding with the other political side, he was concerned with fomenting controversy and attracting attention to his concerns. Because with controversy you reach people, can move them to interact: users assign likes for the videos or get upset about it. In both cases, however, Kirk gained visibility – and thus spread his positions. Kirk led a culture warfare, he was concerned with normalizing the right-wing extremist discourse.
What discussions did Charlie disturb? People came and spoke to him at their own will. Either because they had a message to share, wanted to learn, wanted to be seen, or wanted to troll him.
I also read something about the digital world being a big part of the problem https://calnewport.com/on-charlie-kirk-and-saving-civil-society/
I would not go as far as quitting social platforms ( I am using some for good and productive things) - I find it more important to teach people/students media competence and critical thinking.
Cal Newport wrote the book 'Digital Minimalism' and is a Computer Science Professor, for context to the link I shared.
Leaving social media was the most incredible thing for my creativity, productivity, general wellbeing and overall zest for life. Perhaps my Journalism & Politics degree gave me the tools to see what 'social media' was going to be used for? One unit I studied comes to mind straight away, 'Persuasion, Propaganda and Marketing'. I agree, everyone should be taught those skills at a very young age. Maybe they too will avoid social media like the plague.
Edit to add: I am obviously still using Substack, which I'd also classify as social media. But I left the other platforms years ago now.
I agree wholeheartedly. Social media is not for me.
I won't deny that there are days when I wish we'd never opened that Pandora's Box (I'm born in the early 60s) and when I ask myself if I should rather move to Kangaroo Island and go offline.
But there is still a tiny, tiny spark of hope that the positive part of Social Media will survive. Until then I at least try to minimise the time I spend there (I am not using X or Tiktok - shows my age). But we can't deny that SM is now a big part of life and I'm not sure if not watching what's happening is the solution. More food for thought.
I know a few people who live (or previously did) on Kangaroo Island, it doesn't sound very pleasant community wise.
But yes, no need to put one's head in the sand. I use a RSS feed to get news without algorithm. Like this https://feedly.com/news-reader
It is time for me to unfollow Sarah's substack, sadly. This take appears lazily researched, and hastily written to support a narrative that serves nothing but Sarah's ego.
We don't know who Erika was referring to when she said "they". I didn't immediately take "they" to be the left. I feel as though something will come out about co conspirators but the simple fact is we don't know so why publish it as fact?
Charlie never promoted violence, racism, or targeted attacks against anyone. I challenge anyone to find one example where he does.
To end, Sarah has only shared part of Charlie's quote about empathy. I would encourage anyone reading to research the full quote and context in which he said SYMPATHY IS A BETTER WORD. This was part of a broader conversation.
Hi Emma, I'm sorry you feel this way. I assure you my post was not lazily researched or hastily written. It took a lot of work. I strongly disagree with you - there are countless examples where he has promoted violence, racism etc.
In a June 2024 podcast, he invoked Leviticus 18’s verse about stoning in the Bible when responding to someone who wished LGBTQ+ people a “Happy Pride,” saying “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.” He unashamedly championed murdering thousands of Palestinians to achieve Israel’s “freedom”. He said that black women had small brains, that women should “submit to their husbands”, and that child victims of rape should not be allowed abortions (did you see the video where he said - hypothetically - that he'd make his 10 yo daughter give birth to a baby conceived by rape? I made my statements based on these beliefs that he promotes regularly.
Regarding the empathy line clarification - yes, I'm aware of it. But there is a massive difference IMO btw the two sentiments.
You seem to be a defender or perhaps supporter of Kirk. I ask in genuine good faith, what was it that you felt he offered? What am I missing?
Emma, I'll also just add - and I think this is important - my aim with my post wasn't to focus on Kirk and what he did or didn't say, per se. It was to argue that his death is now being weaponised and signifies a potent "spark"
I think you are taking a lot of this out of context, Sarah, and have fallen to the algorithms you are being fed. Many of his quotes are being shared in a way that is completely out of context. Even his idea of marital submission. Maybe he has different views to you - like about when life starts and when it is ok to end it and biblical marriage - but can't you accept you have different spiritual world views? Why do you have to respond with so much agression and hate? He may have been strong in his views, but it was never delivered with the agressive tone echoed in your writing here.
Hi Sarah. I am more than happy to respond with my own thoughts to each of your points but I will start by sharing my introduction to Charlie.
A video of Charlie showed up on my YouTube algorithm in which he and an individual were debating abortion rights.
The reason, perhaps, that Charlie showed up on my YouTube algorithm is because I had been following Brett Cooper but aside from that my Youtube consumption mainly consisted of tutorials, author vlogs and fitness routines - that is to say, far from political.
I saw a short video in which Charlie was asked if he would make his theoretical 10 year old child give birth (noting, I hope you can understand that I don't want to continue sharing the extremely graphic situation he was asked to provide a response to) as an outcome of an extreme act of violence.
Charlie provided a response - seemingly condeming the graphic and horrific question, no doubt in part because he is a father of a baby and a toddler - and then went on to answer the difficult question posed to him bravely and without waiving his moral conviction.
This is obviously not a direct quote but he said that science proves, and his Christian values state, that life begins at conception. He would not make the baby conceived suffer. He would not respond to tragedy with further tragedy. He would not teach his children to respond to tragedy with tragedy.
I took personal issue with this and showed someone else who, to my amazement, disagreed with me. They asked me, why if i so strongly believe in the human right to life, do I make exceptions for defenceless unborn children based on the circumstances of their conception? I responded to say that because the 10 year olds life was worth more. They asked me why I got to determine the value of one person's life over another in a situation where the two could live without one's heartbeat forcibly being stopped. Where, depending on the stage of the pregnancy, both could live and breath without the baby's limbs being ripped from them inside utero.
I obviously had a lot to think about and decided to watch several of Charlie's videos in full about abortion.
That is how I came to realise how inhumane abortion is and how as a society we have lost our way for continuing to normalise it and speak out against those who speak up for the defenceless.
That is how I came to understand the importance of growing my mindset, questioning everything, and understanding my core values.
Recently a video was shared by Erika of Charlie interacting with their daughter. Anyone can see how much love he has for that little girl and I am in awe of him for putting his life on the line to encourage civil discourse over civil war amongst other things despite how much he and his family had to lose by him being murdered.
Hi Emma - just curious. Have you ever had an abortion? Or been in a situation where you have had to make a decision like this? I have. My husband and I have. We chose to end a pregnancy at 24 weeks because our doctor told us that our daughter (who has already slowed in growth) would mostly like be born at 25/26 week mark and be in the NICU for months with no guarantee of her condition of life (sight, hearing, organ survival brain development). I chose to give birth to her despite knowing all of this and if I could I would it a million times more. She was stillborn and I held her and let her know how much she was wanted and loved. It was the one of the hardest things I have ever had to do but it made me even more aware of the importance of choice for women and their children. We are obviously going to disagree on this issue but unless you have stood in my position, you cannot truly understand. I will always stand up for women and their bodies. Do I think abortion should be utilized as some sort of answer to birth control? Not at all. But it is promoted as such by some outlets which ignores the many other complex stories and situations that parents face on a daily basis. Sorry to capture this one issue but when I see people try to push this narrative as a one size fits all, I can't let it slide.
Hi Liz,
I believe the right to life applies to all humans.
Hi Liz,
I believe the right to life applies to all humans. I previously felt that it was the woman's right to choose however cannot uphold this inate human right without believing this. That is my personal conviction.
I also want to say how sorry I am for your loss x
To say he never promoted violence is laughable, promoting gun ownership and suggesting human deaths warrant that right, is in of itself violent. No matter where you stand the death of a human through means of a gun shot is a violent act. There are also countless examples of him being racist, misogynistic, homophobic, etc the list goes on. As for targeted attacks, how is Kirk’s Turning Point USA “Professor Watchlist” not targeted? I think the importance of this article is to take a step back from the back and forth narrative and to see how this interplays with the wider picture. It's a different perspective.
Charlie was likening the ownership of cars and the amount of vehicle related deaths to the ownership of guns and the amount of gun related deaths.
He advocated for armed guards outside of schools to protect children just as there are armed guards at baseball fields.
He argued that taking away ALL legal gun ownership meant that law abiding citizens wouldn't have a means to protect themselves against illegally owned firearms as well as tyrannical governments.
As for the professor watch list. Have you been through the list? One professor was found to be running a personal blog in which he praises terrorism in America. Another one was found to be promoting and facilitating marriages and "consumation" between students and planetary objects like the ocean.
If someone in Australia started a website exposing teachers of highly prestigious and highly paid schools for promoting terrorism and... whatever the other thing is ... 60 Minutes and ACA would be in a bidding war over it and we'd see a higher registration of trade apprenticeships.
Charlie saw from the age of 18, if not earlier, how much debt people were getting into for an education that did not serve them and so started Turning Point USA to offer people the chance to listen and explore why conventional pathways such as being in student debt might not be for everyone.
Violence is not just about threats of physical harm. There are countless examples of Charlie Kirk being racist, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic... how is this not violent?
All the best 🫶
I kind of feel something underneath all of the noise and the hate and the concerted attempt by the economic powers that be to distance people from a sense of their own humanity. My heart has been breaking for Tyler Robinson and the fear he must have in this time. My heart breaks for Kirk's wife and how her greif has been exploited and radicalized by her political community. For me, walking in the future requires steadfastness and calm, but also that the chaos issues a powerful invitation to see through the hate. Systems and institutions that have become unmoored and are unspooling into the complex array of compounding collapses require me to notice where the light is instead of bracing to be hit by rubble, if that makes any sense -- I have a felt sense of it in my body and it's hard to put words to. I'm not trying to bypass grief about it all, but root myself so deeply in the goodness and gift of my life that I find the light and peace I long for within me. Life isn't so much about reacting to things but living out of a life-force whose umbilical connection to Spirit gives me the inner strength to feel all the heartbreak, love my enemies, and wrap this astonishing world in prayerful love. Edited to add: this also doesn't mean that I look past naming what is hateful and unjust -- but that its power over me to shape my behaviour and how I relate to the world is far weaker than the inner fidelity to seek grace. Or, as Micah put it, to walk humbly, act justly, and love mercy.
I am feeling the same kind of impetus to really ground down into all the humane principles in my being. As I say, understanding the forces at play and the historical contexts allow me to view things from a good distance and to allow for the fact "all those people" haven't suddenly turned evil.
Thank you Sarah for you thought provoking piece. As always I felt you provided a balanced, wide lense approach to this unfolding moment. Sadly many people were murdered on that day in the USA and I feel immense sadness for CK’s loved ones.
For those in the comment section who are analysing the micro details on your article to find parts that align or don’t alone with their view - why are you doing that? As I step back and look at this, I ask myself, where do my values intersect and how does this impact my life? Is this just another example of senseless gun violence in the USA?
I am troubled by the notion that history is repeating itself and I’m watching it play out in real time on social media, displayed via someone else’s value lense and commentary. Everyone wants to rubber stamp this moment in time with their opinion. When we all know the truth has many layers and takes years to document and analysis. Why CK was killed and how will be just another JFK moment in the future.
In a fast paced world where news is spewed forth with hyped up click bait and has global consequences, as all develop nations has full time staff and departments analysing every article entering it into AI for analysis. Each article and their responses are being watched very closely by the big tech bros.
Sarah makes a valid point - is this the spark that sets off a chain of events the ‘speeds up’ the collapse of global stability?
We are all standing on the edge of a mountain, feeling the ground slip beneath our feet but the landslide hasn’t gathered momentum - yet. We all know it’s coming… if it’s not the assassination of CK or a genocide, or Russian drones in NATO air space what will it be? I see this as yet another marker on a road of collapse and its jangled my nerves to the point that I’m ramping up my preparations for a simplification of our global supply chains and infrastructure. As a mother hen, I’m gathering my chicks and building a nest of stability and warmth for my family and community. May CK’s family have the same privacy to create a place of refuge and protection. In the end, that is all that matters.
It is interesting, and perhaps worrying, how some readers here have chosen to quibble over small details about CK, which I clearly state is not the point I'm focusing on. In fact, the opposite. My point is, it doesn't really matter who CK is and exactly what he said, nor who Tyler was or was not dating or whether Mormonism is Christian, it's how this moment is being weaponised that is salient.
You introduce your article with assertions about Charlie Kirk that are obviously not well informed. If the introduction is so misguided, it's difficult to read on and give credibility to any following points that you say you are focusing on.
Making inaccurate comments about someone’s statements should not be brushed off as “small points”. A writer acting genuinely feels a responsibility to seek the truth in what they share.
It seems like you’re acting to create more hate and division, rather than to bring people together in understanding.
The vast majority of people I speak with (in Australia) had no idea who CK was and understand that his death is being ‘used’ for propaganda. Thank you for adding your voice and allowing my comments to feed back into the machines of AI. The landslide of total collapse is picking up pace.
Oh jeeez 🤦🏻♂️ I hope everyone is having a good weekend
I made a note during the week and wanted to share it Sarah , some ideas for the book or possibly in the discussions around upon release
I see a need for a way to better understand our response to stress and upheaval. So that we walk the future with grace
Sarah
A few musings for the book in response to recent posts
A pictogram of the movement of power between the collective and the individual across the centuries
Within individuals , couples , families, communities, countries and empires
The fundamental reasons for the shift in each occasion , the emotions and behaviour driving it
When a society becomes to narcissi and Individualistic the environment and the connections die
When overly connected the individual dies and the environment stagnates and is unresponsive , while engulfed by the masses
What is it in the human race that causes us to lock down into a self destructive spiral of closed mindedness? Of religion or ideology which hijacks our inner wisdom and actual emotions?
I have been reading a lot about the phenomenon lately , how chronic high stress pushes an individual into cults, ideologies or their own ego structure. We are seeing this on an unprecedented global level. Where scared, dysregulated people turn up to UQ in Brisbane to morn Charlie Kirk? Or the comments within your Substack.
How does society recognise the risk of this imbalance and have it at the forefront of our politics and civil works?
How do we catch these over compensations so that we avoid utter destruction?
Rumination is disassociation, if it is regarding a personal issue or a global calamity. And from that place nothing good comes.
It means that you are not living in reality , instead you are living in a disembodied ego created semi conscious state
Someone in balance looks like they are in balance , if they are not looking that way they are not , how do we teach our kids and even the grown ups to see this in plain sight
Part of the way forward is a better understanding of ourselves and then each other , which is a theme in the book. But maybe an avenue to focus on as it is gives a very practical here and now solution on how to cope. And also how to proceed in the future
I hear you Steve...the collapse book just didn't have a FULL scope to cover off the "what now" element. The scope was to really get people solidly collapse aware and to start their own journey. And to maybe establish the leaders who will need to provide guidance. This is partly uncharted territory. The missing bit, of course, is the moral institutions that used to exist to guide us - churches, philosophers, etc. In the vacuum left behind, the Turning Points of the world step in. I think there is much to learn from what these kind of groups are doing...
Can’t you just squeeze it in somewhere 😁😂🙏🏼
It will make for good conversation in the discussions that follows the book though
And yes , the vacuum is vast. I was speaking to one of the guys at work re climate change (did you see the Aussie report on how fucked we are?). He asked if I believe in it.
I just asked him, do you see that the climate is changing rapidly? Do you think that there is a chance we are causing some of it? Either way we can both agree that the world we know is over. And we need to work together to figure out how to adapt rapidly or to fix it. It simplified it for him and he agreed. It did not bring the answers. But like your book it stops the stuffing around and gets to the point. We are fucked 😅
Once I grow a set of balls I will write more and talk more. Thinking of an Alan Jones style Tik Tok where chicks can call in and complain about boys and other fucked up things 😅
Agony Allan, or This sucks with Steve
I agree Sarah, I felt the temperature change. Such a perfect match to light. Are you aware of the shooters lover? It adds gasoline to the fire. He has or had a gay lover who is transitioning to female. Either way you spin it , it just fans the flames.
Was he radicalised by a trans/left/demon? Was he an insider within the right who just sees that their particular brand of power is about to be lost to the fascist majority (ie angry young men and women). Such foder for a million different spins of bullshit.
Plays further into the fevered grounds of destructive ideology and the mental health crisis (social justice, trans, radical feminism, fascism, men’s rights, white power, white shame and victimhood).
Where internalised shame or panic (men’s abusive of power, homosexuality, women’s powerlessness, over achieving or narcissism, environmental and social degradation) is dealt with my massive ego and group identification
The lover detail - yes, I've read these details. But it's another distracting detail. It makes no difference who his lover was. The only bit of interest there is the confession, which I'm sure you agree with. I marvel, as you might too, how many layers of complex "clusterfuckery" this issue has to it...but then...hey, this is collapse !
I’ve been hoping I’m wrong but this also feels like a very dangerous spark to me, or like a huge tear where there were cracks before.
....particularly witnessing the very very very diverse range of inflamed ideas around who Kirk was and what he fought for.
I'm feeling the same, TBH
This perfectly timed tragedy of modern ‘biblical’ proportions is right out of the Rene Girard mimetic playbook (Peter Thiel) with Trump, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and a host of characters scapegoating anyone who is not lock-stock in sync with the politics of Mr Kirk as you describe so well 😳
Very Girard.
this hit me too. I feel in some ways that I am watching a Greek tragedy being acted out in real time.
I think it was Trump and co. Who set up this murder to deflect the attention the Epstein files were having...I know quite the conspiracy theory right?
I'm hearing all kinds of theories...these days it's hard to work out the difference btw the conspiracies and the reality.
The Epstein files connection is not totally unbelievable I have to say.
Also, your comments appear to scoff at the fact Erika participated in a public message about the death of her husband. Charlie had a large following, lots of supporters a network of employees, colleagues, mentees, a church group, etc... not to mention the people at the event also shattered and impacted. She was well within her right to address whoever she damn well pleased.
I can see how my comments might appear to be scoffing of the scale and import attached to Erika's press conference. But, again, however, the main point I was making was that Erika knew he was shot by one young guy AND there was no evidence he was from the Left or that it was a targeted attack on Kirk's mission. I very much found her comments to be jumping to conclusions that had in part been contradicted, and I found them to be dangerous and frightening in the way they point to retribution against some force "out there", as opposed to a lone 22 yo kid.
What exact conclusions were made in her video? What "force" was referenced? She thanked law enforcement for apprehending the murder.
I believe Erika deserves some grace and for her comments not to be picked apart by someone trying to beef up their substack piece. Her husband, and father of her two children, was just murdered aged 31. She has a daughter at home grieving for their dad who was their whole world.
Hi other Emma, you are entitled to your opinions. When I witnessed her press conference, I saw hatred and rage as well as grief. It frightened me. It was like she was calling for war (well she was, but against whom?) I could not help but contrast this with the grace and dignity of Jacqueline Kennedy, or even the words of Rosie Batty after the loss of her son Luke. Each woman is entitled to react however she so chooses during the most confronting and horrific moment of her life. But the difference is stark and utterly revealing. To anyone else here commenting that that man was taken out of context and was not a racist, misogynistic, toxic weapon of mass disinformation, I have nothing for you. To not see it is to be beyond rational debate.
I very much feel Erika's mission was to weaponise CK's death. As she says, she wishes to continue her husband's mission
Why is it so hard to believe that her missions was/is to honour him and pay tribute to not only her husband but also the work he did and the countless others involved in that work.
Because what she actually says goes beyond that
The most reasonable, fair and compassionate interpretation is that this is a grieving woman with a deeply personal expression of grief and love for herself husband whose work she wants to continue to honour as do many. Assuming motive risks unfairly politicising her grief, something I don't believe you are entitled to do. Even though this relationship and family dynamic is something that is severly rare in today's society - which is in my mind probably what is so wrong with the world - I hope you can look past your own biases and have some respect for a mother who has just lost the father of her children.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOt2FW-iRwd/?igsh=MWprNmpjODg3aHVlMA==