Thread by @LauraRbnsn

I don’t like bringing this up because we don’t know who did it and it doesn’t excuse violence either way.
But Kirk got his start by making a list of private citizens for supports to harass.
Remember the professor watch list?
I strongly favor civil dialogue but I truly am

https://twitter.com/realdailywire/status/1966238479005954530

struggling to think of a single person who has consistently modeled it.
I think the fantasy is much more along the lines of “monopolized chaos.” The dream of the day where WE are doing the attacking, but no defending.
That’s not peace. That’s not civility.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about

And no of course the goal of this wasn’t “hey harass these guys!”
But that’s absolutely what happened in practice.

I fear this is a level of nuance social media is capable of. We can absolutely discuss this man as a victim of horrible violence that is easy to condemn.
And, it doesn’t make that person a model of respectful, free dialogue.
What possible reason could you have for compiling a

list of thought criminals that is correspondent with free speech?

You can be a firm believer of a world where everyone can believe and say what they want without fear of reprisal, or you can build a stalking machine targeting people disagree with.
You can’t really do both.

I also say this knowing this is going to get me on a stalking machine and to that all I can say is: my point is not “you deserve violence if you make the stalking machine.”
It’s “don’t make a stalking machine.”