Meh, lazy thinking on religion and oversimplification of history. Yet, there's absolutely an argument to be made that capitalism has provided wider mobility than the Chinese bureaucratic system, the medieval church or merchant states provided before. But mobility is measurably worse in the US now than mid-century and we can and must do better.
It's a narrow and poorly supported view that it truly was money-losing.
Such claims systematically ignore the $45 trillion (current value) extraction from India, and treat the counterfactual of Britain with no Empire incoherently. The captive markets the Empire forced mattered enormously and are too often obfuscated now. Certainly a big part of Empire was about transfering wealth to the elites, so the layperson, or perhaps "Britain" as the state alone if that is your meaning, did not see as much of a direct monetary benefit as they might have.
I think it was a quip strategically designed to make the Americans feel better about themselves even as it clearly puts them down, and to become an aspiration at least. In some sense the history of the US is about unleashing a powerful idea and always falling inshort of living up to it.
The blatant political purposes of acquiring TikTok demonstrate the impoverished status of the US and Israel to millions of representatives of Gen Z, and another platform is ready to rise to bring more truthful takes to the next generation.
You move goalposts and mire yourself in falsehood.
Point 1 empirically wrong. Of course more food was provided after guns went silent.
Point 2 you sound like you agree with me and disagree with your original post.
Point 3. Reveals you as a propagandist.I've demanded that Hamas releases the hostage. From your rather uninformed framing it's clear you think there's a war on all of Gaza and not just Hamas. You just read an article on how Israel engineered a famine, correct? This reveals quite a lot about your relationship to truth and human suffering.
Point 1, nonsense: Allies fed Germans during WW2, the US fed Iraqis and Afghans during their wars and occupations. Point 2, nonsense: The Rafah crossing has been intermittently open, and Egypt has allowed aid in coordination with the UN. Israel has bombed the Rafah crossing multiple times since October 7th. Point 3, whataboutism. Sudan and Yemen are in the news in my circles weekly and there's care for all these horrible events.
The Free Beacon piece feels like it’s arguing against a caricature of the UN report rather than the report itself. The Commission wasn’t trying to do a military balance sheet of Hamas vs. Israel. It was a legal analysis under the Genocide Convention. That means it asked: do Israel’s actions and official statements check the boxes for genocidal acts and intent?
And on that front, the report isn’t just “repeating Hamas numbers.” It leans thoroughly on interviews, satellite imagery, verified video, medical testimony, etc. The ICJ already said there’s a plausible genocide case and ordered Israel to let in more aid months ago. Fast forward: famine is now confirmed in northern Gaza, which really undercuts claims of “unprecedented humanitarian relief.” The UN verdict is a very detailed legal case that can’t just be waved away with “what about Hamas tunnels.” Your "excellent" article doesn't budge the needle at all on this.
Two days before the January 6, 2021 insurrection, there were already clear and documented warning signs that violence was likely. Intelligence units within the FBI and DHS were aware of this chatter, and the FBI’s Norfolk office even issued a report on Jan 5 warning of extremists preparing for “war” at the Capitol. Social media and fringe platforms (Parler, TheDonald.win, Gab, Telegram, etc.) were full of posts openly discussing storming the Capitol, bringing weapons, and even targeting lawmakers.
We can conclude with very high certainty that joining this clamour with promises to send busloads of people to fight was a call for violence at the time.
Yes, Kirk advocated for a violent solution due to the election not going his way. It's also standing in stark juxtaposition to how Brazil handled similar issues with a much greater level of integrity.
"Expect perhaps" now seems as only so much weasel words. Whipping? What manner of government monopoly on violence needs to include whipping?
There are quite a few to be found if you look around.
From Wikipedia:
On January 4, 2021 (the day before the Capitol attack), Kirk tweeted that Turning Point Action and Students for Trump were sending more than 80 “buses of patriots” to Washington, D.C. to “fight for this president.”
On March 21st 2024, he called for the whipping and using rubber bullets and lethal force on migrants at the southern border.
Sounds plenty violent to me. I'd have to agree with those who say there are grounds for seeing Kirk as someone who frequently advocated for violence.