Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

Kirk was assassinated because the left was infuriated by the logic of his arguments. He was all about debating and the left invariably loses when you use logic and facts in a debate about any of the "divisive" topics.

Too many people are unable to change their minds and entrench in a position, even when shown, through facts and fact based logic, that their position is erroneous. Such people are only infuriated by the facts and logic.

If you go back through the postings on this board, you can see it here too.

The infuriated then have a tendency to lash out in violence.

Political violence is most common to the LEFT. Leftists are the ones that start murdering everyone after they take power and set up dictatorships.

BTW, the Nazis were actually leftist. The full name of the party is National Socialist Workers Party of Germany. They started out by promising supporters that they would eventually confiscate the goodies that the rich had and give them to them. The only difference really between the Nazis and the Communists was that the Nazi's were Nationalists (in this case Germans), while the Communists were Internationalists (as in "Workers of the World Unite). There was not much difference in how they ran things within their systems, with one party rule, and one person ultimately controlling everything.

This is encouraging. I almost can't believe the government didn't try to stop them:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2025/09/f ... in-london/

Hope this continues. I think Western Europe is significantly farther down the path to ruination than the U.S., and the people don't have the power of the 1st and 2nd amendments behind them. Eastern Europe still remembers what communism was like, maybe therefore they're not as far down the road.

mooreupp wrote: Thu Sep 11, 2025 10:32 pm External is definitely still possible, but I think there has to be a traumatic experience to bring people back together. It will happen one way or the other and I don't know if one or the other is better (or just as likely, a mix of both).

People will be brought together for the simple reason that their survival will depend on doing so. Domestically we're seeing increased violence but unless we get boiled alive and go down without a fight, we're expecting a blow that should feel like a death blow and the response will be unifying. It's hard to imagine such a shock, but look at the response from 9/11 which will probably be considered small compared to a real nation killer. And COVID brought unification for a short time when it was an unknown thing.
All of the domestic hatred is fueled by small groups for their own purposes. China definitely is involved as well as many others.

External is definitely still possible, but I think there has to be a traumatic experience to bring people back together. It will happen one way or the other and I don't know if one or the other is better (or just as likely, a mix of both).

mooreupp wrote: Wed Sep 10, 2025 11:22 pm Charlie Kirk's death going over badly in younger conservative circles. I don't think this is the fuse, but anger is mounting all around in society.

I hope John was correct about a civil war not happening. I also hope is belief in the difficulty we're going to face is not correct. But it's not looking good for either scenario as shown by this event and many events domestically and worldwide.

Charlie Kirk's death going over badly in younger conservative circles. I don't think this is the fuse, but anger is mounting all around in society.

But both sides of the aisle are dominated by creatures who portend our doom.

I couldn't have said it any better.

Thank you for a breath of fresh ocean "surf" air, even here on the open Southern Plains!

And even though I didn't vote this roundup time (first time too since '72, this due to the disdain and disarray of all the - putting it PG-14 mildly - BS of flowing out of both pathetic sides mouths and minds), you got mine, sir.

India's between a rock and a hard place.

They're not capable of standing up to China on their own, but so long as their strong ties to Russia continue, we're not going to fully trust them. During the Cold War, while technically non-aligned, they were far closer to the Soviet Union in practice.

The idea that India and China are going to have any kind of alliance is pure fantasy. They just about went to war as recently as 2020. Their conflict in the 1960s went badly for India and probably would have been worse had the USSR not intervened on their behalf. However, while the Soviet Union was strong enough to protect them, Russia is not. In fact, China has continued to seize Indian territory.

While they've modernized to a degree, India's been much less successful than China. While they've managed to build something resembling an independent military industry, they're still dependent on exports from Russia, France, and other nations. I doubt they'll be involved in this war from the outset, but sooner or later, they're going to get dragged in. While Russia might like India, they're going to be dependent on China for the foreseeable future.

DaKardii wrote: Fri Sep 05, 2025 10:20 am And whose fault is that?

https://nypost.com/2025/09/05/us-news/t ... est-china/

“Looks like we’ve lost India and Russia to deepest, darkest, China,” Trump snarked on Truth Social as he shared an image of Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi together on the world stage.

“May they have a long and prosperous future together!

”

It would be nice to have a more diplomatic approach. At such a critical juncture it would be nice to have respectable leadership. But both sides of the aisle are dominated by creatures who portend our doom. People still carry on with "normal" life as if we're not dangling over the precipice of doom and accelerating in that direction. Trump is showing that we're probably going to have epochal changes instead of just another average genocidal fourth turning.

And whose fault is that?

https://nypost.com/2025/09/05/us-news/t ... est-china/