Applauding Murder Is Not Justice. It’s Collapse.

A man was shot on stage.
People cheered.

That’s all you need to know to understand how far we've fallen.

There are videos online right now, some viral, of people celebrating the moment Charlie Kirk was gunned down. Not hours later. Not after the facts were in. Immediately. While others stood frozen, one man pumped his fist in joy. Laughing. Triumphant.

Let that sink in.

A bullet enters a human body, and that became cause for celebration.

This isn’t politics. This isn’t activism. This is sickness.

It doesn’t matter what you think of Charlie Kirk.
It doesn’t matter what he said, what he stood for, who he voted for.

No one deserves to be executed for speaking.
And no one should ever be applauded for pulling a trigger.

There is no nuance here. No complexity.
If you celebrate death, you are part of the decay.

And if you find yourself laughing, clapping, or making content out of a murder, then you’ve been fully captured by the machine. Your soul has already been traded for a dopamine hit.

This is not a random event. This is where dehumanization leads.
First, you cancel. Then you mock. Then you erase.
Eventually, someone pulls the trigger, and the crowd goes wild.

We’ve been here before.
Every empire that collapsed into violence walked this path.
Every totalitarian regime started by degrading human life, and getting the crowd to cheer.

I will not soften this. I will not hide behind “but also” or “however.”
What I see online is evil.

The joy. The hunger. The complete lack of conscience.

That’s the real threat.

When a society claps for a killing, it is already dead on the inside.

And so I say this without hesitation:
I condemn it. Every second of it.

I don’t care who it was. I don’t care what the motive was.
We don’t fix the world by becoming murderers in spirit.
We don’t heal by hating.
We don’t awaken by dehumanizing.

You can call it justice.
You can call it karma.
You can call it whatever makes you sleep at night.

But what you applauded was a killing.
And that makes you part of the problem.

Let’s see who has the spine to share this.
Not for me. Not for clicks.
But because there’s still something human left inside you, and it knows what you saw was wrong.

Silence now is consent.

 

How Taxes Should Really Be Treated

For as long as there have been organized states, there have been taxes. In Egypt, Rome, and throughout medieval Europe, rulers demanded contributions to fund wars, build palaces, or secure their own power. Time and again this led to discontent and uprisings, from the Peasants’ Revolt in Germany to the American Revolution, which began with the famous words: “No taxation without representation.”

Today, taxes are firmly embedded in modern constitutions, in Germany’s Basic Law, in Switzerland’s Federal Constitution. But the core problem remains: the state is at once legislator, administrator, and beneficiary of taxes. It controls itself, and public trust continues to erode.

The Idea of Reform

Imagine this: the state is no longer “the boss” but the employee of the people. It does not manage its own funds but applies for resources to cover basic needs and projects. Approval and oversight are carried out by an independent institution, composed of citizens and entrepreneurs from different backgrounds, supported by experts and modern technology.

This is exactly what a draft law for a new Article envisions:

• Independent Institution: Comprised of citizens and entrepreneurs, two-year terms, no re-election.

• Budget Control: The federal government submits a budget; expenses beyond basic needs must be justified and approved.

• Transparency: All revenues and expenditures are publicly accessible.

• Sanctions: Deception, abuse, or undue influence are punishable by loss of office, fines, and prison sentences.

• Crisis Fund: For extraordinary emergencies, with clear criteria and time limits.

The institution would include 400–550 people, divided into a citizen/entrepreneur chamber, expert departments (finance, law, technology & AI, communication), and support staff. It would be funded independently of taxes, through business contributions (max. 0.01% of turnover), fines, and optionally a tiny share of VAT (0.1%). Annual cost: €70–90 million, about 0.02% of the federal budget. The potential savings from more efficient spending could reach billions.

The Core Principle

The principle is simple:
The state is the employee of the people, not the other way around.

That would mean: citizens and entrepreneurs, as the true drivers of the economy and society, take responsibility for ensuring that tax money is used wisely, transparently, and in everyone’s interest.

The final question is:
Who among you would support such a law?