Basically the title.
I'm seeing people praising this Luigi dude. However, I cannot think of a time in history when it became popular to advocate murdering people in the streets that wasn't followed by leftists committing mass atrocities.
All I have seen is an increase in advocacy for murdering white men, right wing ceos, our future president, and anyone seen as wealthy.
I am struggling to see how anyone is reconciling being right wing with the complete disorder and moral failing that murdering random people in the street would involve.
This isn't some issue that is bridging the gap with the left. They want you dead too. They will celebrate your death as well.
This is an example why I think we will never ultimately win because the right is so quick to adopt the ideas of the left.
So please give me an example in history where this hasn't led to bad examples.
To further illustrate my point. Look at the difference in media coverage. We know more about Luigi than the Nashville shooter or Crookes and one murdered a bunch of children and the other shot the president.
Yet we know Luigis social media, his goals and motivation, his childhood and every single picture meant to make him look cool.
If this was true, there would be a hell of a lot of right wing Luigis running around. I think that the reason the right loses is because they don't adopt the ideas of the left, at least as far as how to obtain power and how to properly use it once you have it.
There's the rub. With supposedly right wing people supporting this it gives legitimacy to the left and they will absolutely run with eliminating "undesirables" as non partisan. The right is going cheer while the left actually carries out the atrocities they're saying they want to create
Considering the fact that the left already owns institutional power in the West and is currently using it to slowly crush undesirables with the great replacement, why would they benefit from disrupting institutional power with street assassinations?