Conservatives are defined by the need to burn it all down. The point is that they see a horrible past as glorious, torture as duty, and war as peace.

It doesn’t matter who dies or whatnot, everything is just a tool towards this goal, not the actual motivation behind it.

I think they’re mad. Charlie Kirk was their man, and he was so young, who knows what he could have been. Like, Trump is what, pushing 80? Plus he’s a felon, everyone knows he’s in the Epstein files… he is on his way out, in more ways than one. Kirk is a little cleaner. So all their hopes and dreams of keeping the coloured man down, keeping the “alphabet mafia” as Kirk called the LGBTQ+ community, down, were pinned on this guy, or at least a lot of those hopes, so yeah, they’re pretty pissed.

Thing is, they weren’t gonna let up on people of colour or people of different sexual identities/orientations anyway. And all signs show they were ramping up the violence against minorities. So yeah, they’re mad, but when they say things like “now it’s war” it’s hard to know what they mean since they were waging war before.

It’s like an abusive situation and a lot of these people are probably domestic abusers and come from that mindset. Like they were already going to do damage, but now that you’ve struck back? Oh, now you’re really in trouble. But you were never not in trouble because the problem isn’t you, it’s them. They were always gonna be that way. We have to figure out how to get our country out from under this bullshit.

Charles Kirk was a fascist. Call him that.

They don’t actually give a shit about Charlie Kirk. They just want a catalyst for their enabling acts.

Crocodile tears from crocodiles.

Edit:Alex Jones is already basically comitting taking Kirk’s “job” of going to colleges probably because he’d like a slice of those millions Kirk was paid.

These maga freaks would wear their friend’s skin like a suit if it made them an extra dirty dollar.

Democrat here. Didn’t want to burn it all down. Hoped there would be adults in the room to reel trump in like last time. Nope. He’s wrecking everything and I’m not sure it’s possible to put it all back together again even if it’s possible to put dems in charge.

They’re really unhappy and angry, and I understand why. Kirks views on abortion and LGBT+ in particular make me want to scream, but I’m totally against someone being gunned down like that for their political views. It’s scary for people that vote Conservative.

I’ll worry about 50,000 other things today before the question of how conservatives are feeling crosses my mind. It’s not important.

Maybe? Conservatives are mostly about feelings. The “fuck your feelings” thing was a confession and projection, as most conservative accusations are.

The conservative need to burn everything down got Trump elected.

The problems with Charlie Kirk’s assassination is the following.

First, random gun violence hit a conservative news commentator. Worse, it was someone who grew up in a conservative family. So, you’ve got a lot of conflicting emotions playing out in real time.

Second, there has been a lot of push back regarding what kind of commentator Charlie Kirk was. The discussions of who Kirk was outside of the conservative bubble are leaking in and a lot of Kirk’s fans hate it.

everyone else

Less than half of everyone tho

He didn’t just die. He was murdered. Just saying

Trump & co are working towards stripping away the power of the people who already don’t have much power. I don’t think these two events are comparable.

Charlie Kirk might even have been killed by a far right Goyper. I’m not sure what conservatives can burn down apart from themselves.

no, because charlie kirk is being used as political capital for the base to shore up support, hes nothing more than a prop to conservatives.

also because its the MSMs keeps sustaining the narrative, i bet yuo if they stopped reporting kirk, conservatives would immediately forget him like they did with RUSH.’

also conservatives arnt very keen of upsetting the status quo, aka challenging the govt, as they claim, they dont change very well. they love to bitch about it, but they arnt community organizers and dont protests. plus as you have seen there are subdivision if within the republican party, magats to the right, groypers, the kirks, peterson, shapiros.

It’s all going to be a bit presumptuous unless someone who genuinely identifies as a conservative and it’s steeped specifically in the subcultures and particular varieties of conservatism Kirk was in to chimes in, but I’m not sure that they have that feeling in the way you’re describing in response to this incident because I guess you kind of can’t really feel that way more so when you’re already at that point that you feel like things are unsalvageable. Reaching that point, or being at that point already seems to be sort of the essence of the MAGA movement and why it was so successful even as people pointed out hypocrisies amongst it’s proponents or how the tenets of conservatism seemed so changeable so long as it’s Trump changing them at any given moment. Their movement basically encapsulated this with phrases like “drain the swamp”. They already long since considered the establishment order a quagmire.

Despite the irony that their saviour is still running for office within that system and contesting in elections within the supposedly beyond-fixing electoral system, they feel, I think, that Trump and his malleable brand of conservatism represents the final “burn everything down” revolution that will eventually result in the phoenix of the “great” America rising from the ashes. In this way it’s fine for Trump to forgo or undermine elections in future, to destroy institutions, even act in apparent defiance of supposedly core conservative ideals at times, because it’s part of the master plan to get rid of all the undesirables and defang opposition to the great new order that will eventually emerge.

To my mind within that framework, the maximal point fatigue and the end of patience and tolerance for the status quo was long since reached and support for Trump isn’t like traditional support for a candidate in the past, it’s more like outsourcing the revolution they’d otherwise take part in themselves, minimising the risk to themselves in the process. Events like the Kirk shooting do seen dangerous though in as much as many of those supporters likely think of themselves as revolutionaries in waiting until either the official word is given or some transcendent event lights the fuse in some way that becomes clear once it happens. This shooting might be viewed in that light. So rather than reacting to it like “that’s it! I’m now fed up with this system, time to burn it down” it could be more like “that’s the signal, I’ve already packed my go-bag and the gun under my pillow was already loaded anyway”.