The nature of Kirk’s death does not change the fact that this was an incredibly dangerous and destructive person. I know people like Ezra Klein or the moderates at The New York Times or in our media or particular members of the Democratic Party feel a need to revise who he was and what he did in order to make themselves feel better. Because Kirk was murdered, it is difficult for some to be honest about how he spent his life. Kirk radicalized young people, which is grotesque. He whitewashed slavery, spread racial hatred, vilified vulnerable people, attacked the rights and protections of people of color, women, and the LGBTQ community. To use your platform or voice to normalize or aggrandize any of that is despicable.
Friday, September 12, 2025
Whitewashing Charlie Kirk Promotes Political Violence
Whitewashing Charlie Kirk
Promotes Political Violence
The murder of Kirk was evil. Lying about him is also wrong.
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Following Charlie Kirk’s assassination, most Democratic politicians and
journalists have denounced political violence in general and the attack on Kirk
in particular. That is as it should be; Kirk’s murder was horrific. We don’t
know anything about the shooter or their motivations, but we do know that
whatever the motivations, murder is wrong and evil. As Congresswoman Ayanna
Pressley said, “He was someone’s son. He was
someone’s husband. He was a father to two young children.”
Wed, 10 Sep 2025 21:33:08 GMT
Some people, however, have gone beyond the denunciation of the violent attack on Kirk, and have argued that Kirk’s cause, and his political life, were virtuous. Most notably, Ezra Klein at the New York Times published an op-ed declaring that “Charlie Kirk was Practicing Politics the Right Way.” Klein in the piece argues that Kirk forswore political violence and extremism and championed rational nonviolent debate on college campuses.
You can dislike much of
what Kirk believed and the following statement is still true: Kirk was
practicing politics in exactly the right way. He was showing up to campuses and
talking with anyone who would talk to him. He was one of the era’s most effective
practitioners of persuasion.
The main problem with this is that it is a lie. Kirk was not especially interested in persuasion. He was an enthusiastic supporter of the January 6 insurrection; his organization, Turning Points USA, bussed people to the coup—including one man who stormed the capital and beat police with a fire extinguisher. Kirk continued to defend the insurrection and TPUSA’s role in it for years.
Kirk’s assault on democracy did not start on January 6. TPUSA has been touted (by Klein and others) as some sort of righteous free speech advocacy group promoting debate on campus. But that (again) is a lie. In fact, TPUSA’s main purpose is summed up by its “Professor Watchlist” a website which lists teachers and professors who TPUSA believes “discriminate against conservative students, promote anti-American values and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom.”
In short, the Watchlist is intended as, and functions as, a mechanism to stifle academic freedom by targeting those on the left—especially women and BIPOC professors—for stochastic terrorism and harassment. Professors on the list say that they regularly receive hate mail and death threats—and that the threats accelerated after January 6, the insurrection that TPUSA supported. The link to the recent firing of a children’s literature professor reported by a conservative student for talking about “gender” is quite clear. TPUSA was a leader of a conservative moral panic designed to terrorize liberal professors and drive them from the academy—a moral panic which has metastasized into Trump’s unprecedented, openly ideological campaign to defund universities.
Kirk has also just openly called for political violence himself; he praised as Biblical and “perfect” the idea of stoning LGBT people to death, and argued that gun deaths were “worth it” to preserve Second Amendment rights. Klein says it’s not fair to argue that Kirk deserved to die by gun violence because he was opposed to gun control, and that is true. What Klein refuses to grapple with, however, is that, Kirk claimed that the Second Amendment needed to be preserved through violent death. That’s an argument which explicitly says that we should see children killed in school shootings as an inevitable necessary sacrifice to politics. It’s a justification of political violence.
Kirk was not a proponent
of democracy or of free speech. Nor was he an opponent of political violence.
To say he was is (one more time) a lie. It’s also an insult to Kirk’s
victims—including professors, those who died on January 6, and LGBT people who
he threatened with violent death, just for starters.
Worse, though, by cosigning Kirk’s political approach, Klein cosigns Kirk’s contempt for democracy and his embrace of political violence. Klein thinks that by reaching across the aisle and praising Kirk’s free speech while ignoring the content of the speech, he is doing good work to ratchet down political animosity and political violence. But he is not. Instead, what he is doing is giving the far-right cover to terrorize, harass, target, and even (in the case of January 6) murder opponents. Klein is saying that political violence against the right is wrong, but that political violence perpetrated by the right is “practicing politics the right way.”
Is Klein unaware of
Kirk’s actual views? Does he not know of Kirk’s involvement in January 6? Is he
deliberately obscuring Kirk’s violent rhetoric and actions because he thinks
it’s politically expedient, or because he thinks it will advance his own career?
I have no idea. But I do
know this: praising Charlie Kirk’s politics, erasing his efforts to destroy
democracy, will not help democracy and is not a way to reduce political
violence. You cannot solve our current fascist nightmare with lies, and
certainly not by pretending that the fascists aren’t fascist, or that they
forswear violence.
Yes, we should oppose
political violence. That means opposing the kind of vicious assassination that
targeted Charlie Kirk. It also means opposing the harassment, the insurrection,
and the assaults on marginalized people which Kirk promoted throughout his
life. Violence against Charlie Kirk is wrong. But Klein and those like him seem
to have embraced the idea that the only violence that matters is violence
against Charlie Kirk and those like him. If we memory hole and ignore the
violence that Kirk spent his life promoting, we end up with fascism. And
fascism is not, to put it mildly, a route to peace or democracy.
Did Trump Just Declare War on the American Left?
Did
Trump Just Declare War on the American Left?
After
Charlie Kirk’s tragic killing, the President speaks not of ending political
violence but of seeking political vengeance.
September
11, 2025
In the hours immediately after the conservative activist
Charlie Kirk was shot and killed in front of a large
crowd of students at a Utah university on Wednesday, there was no word on who
had actually done it and no explanation for why it had happened. But, in
Washington, those who profess certainty no longer need much in the way of facts:
partisans come equipped with preëxisting truths, and events are slotted into
narratives that existed long before the events occurred. Even before Kirk’s
death had been confirmed, Nancy Mace, a Republican congresswoman from South
Carolina, spoke to reporters outside the Capitol. “Democrats own what happened
today,” she told them. When Ryan Nobles, the chief Capitol Hill correspondent
for NBC News, asked her if, by that logic, Republicans would own the shooting
this summer of two Minnesota Democratic lawmakers, she replied, “Are you
kidding me? . . . Some raging leftist lunatic put a bullet
through his neck and you want to talk about Republicans right now?
No. . . . Democrats own this a hundred per cent.”
In a different time, it might have
been easier to dismiss Mace as just playing to the cameras, and to take heart
instead from the many statements rejecting political violence and expressing
shock, horror, and solidarity that were already rolling in from Democrats and
Republicans alike. Vice-President J.D. Vance offered a heartfelt eulogy on X,
calling the thirty-one-year-old political provocateur, who had been his close
friend, an exemplar of “a foundational virtue of our Republic: the willingness
to speak openly and debate ideas.” But the visceral rage channelled by Mace was
not an outlier. On the House floor, when Speaker Mike Johnson called for a
moment of silent prayer for Kirk, members from both parties rose from their
seats and the brief hush suggested that at least some of the old habits of
ritual bipartisanship in a crisis might still be intact. Then a shouting match
erupted, with Lauren Boebert, a Colorado Republican, loudly
demanding more than a silent prayer and various Democrats objecting that there
had been no prayer offered for students in a mass shooting that same day in
Colorado. Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Republican, shouted back at the
Democrats, “You all caused this.”
A few hours later, Donald
Trump reacted to Kirk’s death, in a four-minute Oval
Office video that he posted
on his social-media feed. There would be no Joe Biden-esque lectures about “the
need for us to lower the temperature in our politics,” or about how, while “we
may disagree, we are not enemies.” (Which was what Biden actually said when Trump was grazed by a would-be assassin’s
bullet in the summer of 2024.) Instead, Trump explicitly laid blame for what he
called a “heinous assassination” on his and Kirk’s political opponents. He
neither cited any evidence nor seemed to think that any was necessary. He made
no mention of any of the political attacks in recent years that have claimed
Democratic victims, including, earlier this summer, the shooting of two Minnesota state legislators,
one of whom died.
“For years, those on the radical left
have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst
mass murderers and criminals. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for
the terrorism that we are seeing in the country today, and it must stop right
now,” Trump said, before offering a list of other victims of “radical-left
political violence,” including himself. He promised swift action to take down
the perpetrators of such violence as well as “organizations” that fund and
promote it. Trump’s remarkable threat somehow did not get much attention. It
should have. Not only was the President not even trying to unite the country
but he seemed to be blaming the large chunk of the nation that reviles his
racially divisive policies and those promoted by Kirk as surely as if they had
pulled the trigger.
Some of Trump’s most influential
allies and advisers were clarifying what this could mean by explicitly calling
for a crackdown on the American left—hardly consistent with the spirit of free
expression that Kirk used as his rallying cry for recruiting a new generation
of young conservatives. “It’s time for the Trump administration to shut down,
defund, & prosecute every single Leftist organization,” Laura Loomer, a
far-right conspiracy theorist who has successfully pushed Trump to fire a
number of senior national-security officials, wrote on X. “We must shut these
lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The Left is a national security
threat.” Christopher Rufo, another influential Trumpist,
who led the move against diversity initiatives that eventually became a core tenet of the second Trump
Administration, invoked the political convulsions of the nineteen-sixties. “The last time the radical
Left orchestrated a wave of violence and terror, J. Edgar Hoover shut it all
down within a few years,” he wrote. “It is time, within the confines of the
law, to infiltrate, disrupt, arrest, and incarcerate all of those who are
responsible for this chaos.”
And in case there was any mistaking
the official view of such pronouncements, Trump’s deputy chief of staff Stephen
Miller on Thursday joined in from the West Wing, promising in a lengthy post on
X to wage war on the “wicked ideology” that had killed Kirk and the proponents
of it who, he claimed, were online cheering Kirk’s death. “The fate of our
children, our society, our civilization hinges on it,” Miller added. Dialing it
down, they were not.
It was purely a sad coincidence that
Kirk’s killing happened to fall just a day before September 11th, when Trump
would be marking the twenty-fourth anniversary of the attacks on the United
States. The destruction of the Twin Towers in New York by Osama bin Laden and
his band of Islamic extremists brought forth the George W. Bush
Administration’s “global war on terror”—another war against an ism that first
motivated Miller and many other young conservatives to become politically
active in the early two-thousands. Back in his student days, Miller launched a
project to warn against the threat of “Islamofascism,” and portrayed the United
States as having been forced into a worldwide conflict with radical Islamic
jihadist ideology.
How striking it is, then, to read
Miller’s manifesto about what he considers to be today’s chief threat, which,
like much of Trump and his MAGA movement’s
current rhetoric, is focussed not against external adversaries such as Russia
and China but on the scary prospect of a violent enemy within, “an ideology
that has been steadily growing in this country which hates everything that is
good, righteous and beautiful and celebrates everything that is warped, twisted
and depraved,” as Miller called it.
Although it’s fair to point out that
much of what Miller wrote about today’s leftists in response to Kirk’s death is
similar to what he might have said about Islamic terrorists a couple of decades
ago, it’s not Miller’s lack of creativity that stands out, so much as the speed
and explicitness with which he—and Trump—chose to exploit the shooting of one
of their most important allies in service of a sweeping attack on the American
political left.
While others were praying for a sane
conversation around how to end the rapidly escalating problem of violence
across the political spectrum, the President and his close adviser defined the
crisis differently: it was about the American right under siege—and what Trump
was going to do about it. The point here was clear for those who chose to
listen: the President doesn’t care one bit about all those sanctimonious calls
for healing. It is not a dialogue about the crisis of political violence in
America that he wants right now but an aggressive new policy of political
vengeance. ♦
Thursday, September 11, 2025
What Happened Yesterday Was NOT About "Freedom."
What Happened
Yesterday Was NOT About "Freedom."
Tragedy no longer binds us. It tears us further apart.
Sep 11, 2025
Every morning, when I drop my children off at school, I do
something I wish no parent had to do. I memorize what they are wearing. The
shade of a shirt, the scrape on a sneaker, the way a backpack strap slips off a
small shoulder. I press it into memory like a photograph I pray will never be
needed. And I don’t do this out of sentiment. I do it because too many parents
have said the only way they recognized their children after a shooting was by
the clothes they had on.
That truth sits inside me like glass. It slices into every
goodbye. It turns the simple act of watching them walk away into a quiet kind
of mourning. And this — this constant fear — is not the ritual of a free
country.
I do not want this reality for my children. I do not want
it for anyone’s children.
Yesterday was a sorrowful day for America. Not because
Charlie Kirk was a saint — he most certainly was not — but because he was a
man, and his life was ended violently, abruptly, without mercy. He had a life
he was living. He had people who loved him. He was someone’s son. Someone’s
husband. Someone’s father. Someone whose absence will leave an empty chair and
an unfillable silence at the table. And that matters — even to me, even though
I could not stand the words he made a living on or the worldview he championed.
I did not admire him. I did not agree with him. But he was alive yesterday, and
today he is not. And that truth, in and of itself, is profoundly sad.
His words cut deep. His rhetoric was poison poured into
open mouths. It hardened hearts that were still tender, licensed cruelty where
compassion should have taken root, dressed prejudice up as patriotism and
falsehood as truth. His legacy was damage, and I won’t pretend otherwise. For
years I’ve battled his opinions, dismantled his arguments, railed against the
harm he caused. He was an adversary I met again and again in the arena of
ideas. But this? This is not how I ever wanted him to meet his end. Debate is
not death. Disagreement is not execution.
When I first learned he was dead, I cried. Senator Alex
Padilla told me in real time as we were recording a podcast. I didn’t cry
because I loved Charlie Kirk — I didn’t. I cried because this is not what I
want for my country. I cried because this is not what I want for anyone,
anywhere. The tears came from grief, not for him, but for us — because this is
not who we should be.
I’m not asking anyone to mourn Charlie Kirk. I’m asking us
not to lose ourselves. To stop for a moment. To breathe. To hold our children
closer. Because every time violence wins, another piece of our shared humanity
dies with it.
We don’t yet know the shooter’s motive. Maybe it was
political. Maybe it was personal. Maybe it was chaos for its own sake. But in
some ways, the motive is beside the point, because the ending is always the
same. Always a gun. Always a trigger. Always a life gone in a flash. That is
the rhythm of America now — the unbroken drumbeat of violence, so steady we
have taught ourselves not to flinch.
Even if yesterday had never happened, grief would still be
spreading through another home today. Because in this country, grief is the one
thing we manufacture endlessly. Yesterday, while the nation argued over Kirk’s
death, a gun was fired inside Evergreen High in Colorado. A student pulled out
a weapon, shot two classmates, then turned it on himself. One child is fighting
to live. Another will carry scars. And because it happened on the same day as
an assassination, it is already fading from the news, disappearing into the
pile of forgotten tragedies that should never have been ordinary.
That is what terrifies me most: how quickly the
extraordinary becomes routine. How numb we are forced to be just to keep
breathing.
And today, that grief is sharpened by memory. Today is
September 11. Twenty-four years since the sky itself broke open, twenty-four
years since towers turned to ash, since sirens and silence filled the air. I
had just left New York a few months before. My now ex-husband had just left his
job at Windows on the World. That day was meant to bring our country to its
knees — and it did. But it also bound us, if only briefly. Strangers held each
other in the streets. Flags bloomed on porches. We wept together. For one
fragile moment, we remembered what it meant to belong to each other.
How far away that feels now.
Today, tragedy doesn’t bind us. It tears us further apart.
Violence doesn’t humble us; it is spun into propaganda before the blood has
dried.
When Donald Trump was grazed by a bullet last year in
Butler, Pennsylvania, Joe Biden did what leaders are supposed to do. He
steadied the nation. He said, “We resolve our differences at the ballot box,
not with bullets.” He cooled the temperature. He reminded us of our common
humanity. That is leadership. That is democracy, holding on by its fingertips.
Last night, Trump chose the opposite. He offered no pause,
no grace, no truth. He lunged straight for blame. He wrapped Charlie Kirk in
martyrdom and flung accusations at Democrats before the facts could even
breathe. He poured gasoline onto a country already on fire because he cannot
survive without flames.
And the chorus followed. Politicians. Influencers. Fox News
anchors. A choir of rage repeating the same refrains: Democrats are guilty.
Critics share the blame. People like me — people who spent years calling out
Kirk’s cruelty — have blood on our hands. And then they said I should be next.
Think about that. They want me guilty of another person’s
bullet. And they want me punished with my own.
That is particularly grotesque, because we know who built
this tinderbox. We remember.
We remember the chants of “Lock her up!” echoing like
ritual.
We remember the smirks and winks that turned violence into
an inside joke.
We remember January 6 — the mob in tactical gear, the
gallows against a winter sky, fists and flagpoles slamming into police shields.
We remember the blood smeared across marble while a
president watched it unfold like reality TV.
We remember the pardons handed out like confetti afterward.
We remember the laughter when Paul Pelosi’s skull was
nearly crushed, his suffering played for laughs.
We remember Minnesota — Rep. Melissa Hortman and her
husband, murdered. Senator John Hoffman and his wife, riddled with bullets. And
we remember what followed: Senator Mike Lee pointing fingers at “Marxists”
while families bled. Trump refusing even to call Governor Tim Walz. Refusing to
attend the funerals. Calling it all a waste of his time. In the face of grief,
they chose spite.
This did not fall out of the sky. It was cultivated. It was
stoked. It was rewarded. And now the fire is devouring us all.
And while they fanned the flames, they locked every window
that could have let in air. Universal background checks? Blocked. Red flag
laws? Blocked. Safe storage? Blocked. Limits on weapons of war? Blocked. Again
and again. Children murdered in schools, families gunned down in churches,
shoppers slain in aisles — and they shrugged. They told us this was the “price
of freedom.”
Charlie Kirk himself once said some deaths from gun
violence were that price — the toll liberty demanded. But tell me: does
Evergreen High feel like freedom? Did yesterday feel like freedom? No. It felt
like fear. It felt like tyranny. It felt like a country unraveling under the
weight of cruelty, a place where ballots have been traded for bullets. And
still, even knowing he once excused such deaths, I say it again: Charlie Kirk
did not deserve this end. None of us do.
I can hold two truths. I can say Charlie Kirk’s rhetoric
was destructive, and I can say his murder is a tragedy. I can despise what he
spread and still mourn the violence that took him. What I will not do is let
anyone tell me that my words — my refusal to stay silent — are violence, while
their incitement is patriotism.
How I wish we had a leader who could turn the temperature
down. Someone capable of compassion. Someone who would stand before us and say:
political violence has no place here. Ever. Oh how I wish.
Instead, we have a man who thrives on chaos, who breathes
rage the way the rest of us breathe air. And behind him, a movement addicted to
division because without it they are nothing. No vision. No policies. No
solutions. Just grievance. Just fury. Just hunger for power at any cost.
Yesterday was a dark day for America. Not because Charlie
Kirk was noble — he wasn’t — but because his violent death revealed, yet again,
the sickness eating us alive: a nation where rage is currency, where violence
is strategy, where every tomorrow threatens to look like yesterday.
And I am terrified of what comes next.
Because it is not just our safety on the line — it is our
decency. I am afraid we are losing our capacity for compassion, our instinct
for empathy, our basic humanity. I am afraid we are letting cruelty become our
default setting. And if we let that happen, if we allow ourselves to become as
callous as the people who celebrate this violence, then the experiment of
democracy is already over.
I do not want to memorize my children’s clothes every
morning, whispering a silent prayer they come home alive. I do not want their
inheritance to be fear. I do not want to live in a country where every goodbye
could be forever.
So hear me when I say this:
We will not be ruled by terror.
We will not be quieted by bloodshed.
We will not let democracy be dismantled by cowards who kill
from the shadows.
We will not be gaslit into believing we have blood on our
hands for daring to call out dangerous rhetoric. And we will not accept threats
of retribution — threats that glorify cruelty and demand silence, that thirst
for more violence and more war.
We will not hand our children a future where fear is the
air they breathe.
We will stand in the open. We will pause. We will breathe.
We will hold our children closer. Because our humanity is the one thing they
cannot take unless we surrender it to them.
Because democracy is not inherited like an heirloom. It is
hammered into existence by exhausted, terrified, furious people who refuse to
quit.
And that is who we are.
Not the mobs. Not the executioners. Not the cowards who
hide behind guns and call it strength.
We are the ones who stitch the fabric back together, thread
by trembling thread. The ones who carry lanterns into rooms that reek of smoke.
The ones who cradle each other when the weight of grief would crush us. The
ones who insist — against every bullet, every lie, every coward’s threat — that
mercy, not violence, will have the last word.
Because if Charlie Kirk’s murder teaches us anything, it is
that violence is never an answer — it does not resolve a single argument, it
only carves deeper scars into a nation already bleeding. And if September 11
still teaches us anything, twenty-four years later, it is that grief is a
crossroads: it can harden us into cruelty, or it can soften us into kinship. I
remember how, for one trembling instant, that day bound us together — strangers
clutching strangers, a wounded country remembering it still had a heart. The
question now is whether we will let bullets keep shredding what is left of that
heart, or whether we will summon the strength to hold on to our decency, our
empathy, our capacity to feel for one another before it slips away forever.
Because this is not freedom.
This is not justice.
And this is not the America we promised our children — the
ones walking into classrooms with backpacks too heavy for their small
shoulders, the ones who deserve a future built on safety and decency, not on
blood and fear.
And I, for one, will not let violence write their future.
Not now. Not ever.
Be careful not to inadvertently help sainthood Charlie Kirk
In the quest for nuance, empathy, and understanding, be
careful not to inadvertently help sainthood Charlie Kirk
Sep 11, 2025
Very rarely do I narrow the scope so tightly on whom I am
speaking to in my essays, but this is going to be one of those cases. I am
writing this quite specifically to those who were not frequent targets of the
words of Charlie Kirk. This is for those of you who might have never heard of
him before today. Even if you align yourself with words like “progressive” or
“left-leaning,” he might be a new figure in your world, though he wasn’t for a
lot of people. Perhaps you are new to this fight for social justice, and you
can’t wrap your head around why someone, anyone, would have a reaction any less
than immediately saying, “There is no place in a civil society for this…”
If you can not understand why someone would have a visceral
reaction to the loss of someone so vile, then you are one of the lucky ones.
Perhaps you weren’t someone who lost family members to his
rhetoric. But so many others were. I have seen his vile words slither into the
minds of people I was once close to. Even now, I am seeing folks that I had no
idea held his views as valuable mourning him and quoting him. So many of us are
having to realize that people we thought were safe are not. This is being piled
on after nearly a decade of already losing so many people to his malignant
despotism.
So, you might be sitting here watching folks shrug off the
death of another and saying, “How can you lack empathy? How can you lack
understanding?” And I am asking you the very same question. How can you lack
empathy and understanding for those whom he harmed?
I recently wrote about an experience I had when my cousin
died, and my instant guttural reaction was to laugh, “Just a few years after
leaving the priesthood, on a not-so-eventful day, I received a call from my
mother letting me know that my cousin had died. Moreover, he had been murdered.
A sense of relief flushed over my body, knowing that I would never have to see
his face again. That he could no longer lurk in dark corners or harm anyone
else. At the news, I laughed instead of cried. I had been released from my own
personal Hell, whose flames nipped at my heels anytime
the specter of possibly seeing him would rise. Immediately upon his death, he
was sainted in the media. I have visited his grave once, only to ensure that it
existed. I said no words, I did not piss upon it (as I often joked I would),
and I prayed no prayers. His being dead was enough.”
The context of these words was that I didn’t need there to
be a Hell for him to suffer in for all
eternity, but I was also not obligated to mourn an evil man meeting a demise of
his own creation. My cousin lived a violent life, causing immense harm and
destruction anywhere that he went. As a result, he met a violent end.
Some of the reactions I have seen toward those who can not
muster alligator tears in this moment would be like Dorthy turning around to
the Munchkins, saying, “How dare you sing that song! She was a sister, a
friend, and she went to school once.”
Charlie Kirk spent his life vilifying people. Most
specifically, he went after the most vulnerable amongst us. He turned their
parents and siblings against them. He made using the restroom a battleground.
He called Black people less than human. In the wake of school shootings, he
told parents that their children dying in the hallways was a necessary casualty
of protecting the Second Amendment. With his words and actions, he dehumanized
anyone who was different than him and actively fought for a world in which
those folks were erased. After the attempted assassination of Paul Pelosi, he
said that folks should bail him out. He made heroes out of the worst people
imaginable and wished harm on those with whom he disagreed. He fomented young
people to become violent so that he could hide behind his words and demand
nuance, only to serve himself, and never gave grace to those he saw as other.
Now, the very people that he has spent his life demonizing
are being blamed for his death without cause or merit.
But because a trans teenager who is living in their car,
rejected by parents over the words of Charlie Kirk, made a Tweet that said,
“Ding dong, the witch is dead,” you are responding from the safety of your
home, demanding a nuance that you aren’t willing to give them.
Top of Form
Subscribe
Bottom of
Form
If you have never been on the receiving end of being a
target of Charlie Kirk, and you are only seeing passive things he said that are
being quoted by his allies, then you aren’t seeing the full picture. I am aware
that the video of what happened to him is shocking, and the guttural reaction
is to have empathy for his family. I would even go so far as to say that having
such empathy is good in a sense, it means you aren’t as vile as he, a man who
couldn’t find empathy at all for anyone, and actually demeaned empathy as
weakness. Yet, if you can not also find empathy for those whom he and his
followers have perpetually victimized, then you are missing a major component
in all of this. Every despot alive had a mother, but you will not find me
crying at the graves of evil men who had their regimes toppled by those they
subjugated.
It is good that you are able to find empathy in this
moment; it means you aren’t like him. However, it does not mean that those who
do not mourn him are. That is an important distinction.
Countless people have lost their lives to the violent
rhetoric of Charlie Kirk; those lives also mattered. Is it possible that he
would have changed if given a longer life? Perhaps, but playing an experimental
game of “what if” is also dangerous in this moment.
In the aftermath of his death, the Christian Nationalists
were quick, without any proof, to lay blame at the feet of the trans community.
This is the very same thing that Charlie Kirk was so well known for. He did
this countless times, and by doing so, he put their lives in danger. Those who
followed him are quickly taking up the mantle. Even today, Donald Trump
eulogized Charlie Kirk by stating that he died because folks called him a Nazi,
while at the same time lumping everyone who disagreed with him as “the radical
left.”
The writing is on the wall that this moment will be used to
justify rounding up more immigrants into concentration camps. They are setting
the stage to make it illegal to call a fascist what they are. And, I promise
you, that a time is coming soon when anyone who criticizes this administration
will be considered a terrorist. It is already happening now in other parts of
the world. The mere attempt to protest is landing folks in handcuffs. We are
watching our fundamental rights being stripped away from us.
Yes, we are all unsafe in this moment, but we must take a
beat to realize who will suffer first: immigrants, refugees, activists, Black
folks, Muslims, the queen community, and our trans siblings. They are
profoundly in more danger today than they were yesterday. They are being
saddled with the blame for what happened long before someone has even been
arrested or a motive announced.
I am fully aware that somewhere in the world, a woman is
crying because her husband is dead. She had to sit down and explain to her
young children that their father isn’t coming home. That reality is not lost on
me. Inasmuch as I am able, I can see that scene play out in my mind's eye, and
I know that they are feeling pain today. It is this idea, this true thing, that
you are demanding that people also take a moment to acknowledge. I hear that.
The counter to this narrative is that so many folks who this very man has
harmed are asking you, “How can you hear her cries over the children dying in
the streets from these endless wars, above the tears of the trans person
sobbing in their car about to lose their life, and beyond the children hiding
under their desks at school?”
I need you to understand that what I have written here
today will likely be read at my own sentencing someday, when they justify
ripping me away from my children simply because I wrote words, asked questions,
and openly challenged the narrative of my government. That is the nuance you
are asking to understand.
Most of us have lived with the privilege of this type of
violence happening on shores far away from us, and so seeing it playing out in
our own streets and universities is jarring. But, make no mistake, this is not
new. These politicians who are demanding civility now watched videos far more
horrific than you saw in the last 24 hours happening to elementary school
children and looked the other way to justify their political ends. They have
lacked empathy at every moment from Columbine to Sandy Hook, but are now
feigning shock that no one can mourn the wicked.
So, before you write words condemning those who cannot find
it within themselves to shed a tear for the man who tore them apart, I am
begging you to have empathy and understanding for THEM in this moment. Take a
beat to read his words, to fall down a night-long rabbit hole, actually
investigating the final solution that they hoped would come from things like
Project 2025. Listen to the hurt and pain and reality from those whom Charlie
Kirk wished to see deported, arrested, and executed.
I am begging you to do this now, because very soon, those
voices will be silenced, and the only thing that you will be able to hear is
propaganda being pumped by the mechanisms created and endorsed by the man you
are demanding that they mourn.
You should be shocked by political violence. I desperately
hope and fight for a world where no one has to see what we all saw this week.
That is a noble cause and a beautiful hope. But, at this time, we must also
live in reality. The real world that we are all tethered to is that Charlie
Kirk was a White Christian Nationalist who promoted hate and violence. He
diminished countless people. Those politicians who have spent decades saying we
can not politicize the death of school children who died are now using the
death of this man, who championed these tragedies, as a political tool. They
said there was nothing that could be done, that nothing could stop these
horrors. That there would always be a good guy with a gun. That we should trust
the process. Yet, make no mistake, they will suddenly find the motivation to
stop violence. But they will use violence to do so. It is only a matter of time
before they start rounding up people who were never involved in his death,
purely based on their identity and ideology. I need you to hear their cries.
It is good that you are repulsed by political violence. I
am too. I am just begging you to cast a wider net on that outrage.
LINKS TO RELATED SITES
- My Personal Website
- HAT Speaker Website
- My INC. Blog Posts
- My THREADS profile
- My Wikipedia Page
- My LinkedIn Page
- My Facebook Page
- My X/Twitter Page
- My Instagram Page
- My ABOUT.ME page
- G2T3V, LLC Site
- G2T3V page on LinkedIn
- G2T3V, LLC Facebook Page
- My Channel on YOUTUBE
- My Videos on VIMEO
- My Boards on Pinterest
- My Site on Mastodon
- My Site on Substack
- My Site on Post
LINKS TO RELATED BUSINESSES
- 1871 - Where Digital Startups Get Their Start
- AskWhai
- Baloonr
- BCV Social
- ConceptDrop (Now Nexus AI)
- Cubii
- Dumbstruck
- Gather Voices
- Genivity
- Georama (now QualSights)
- GetSet
- HighTower Advisors
- Holberg Financial
- Indiegogo
- Keeeb
- Kitchfix
- KnowledgeHound
- Landscape Hub
- Lisa App
- Magic Cube
- MagicTags/THYNG
- Mile Auto
- Packback Books
- Peanut Butter
- Philo Broadcasting
- Popular Pays
- Selfie
- SnapSheet
- SomruS
- SPOTHERO
- SquareOffs
- Tempesta Media
- THYNG
- Tock
- Upshow
- Vehcon
- Xaptum
Total Pageviews
GOOGLE ANALYTICS
Blog Archive
-
▼
2025
(607)
-
▼
September
(27)
- MAGAts
- Whitewashing Charlie Kirk Promotes Political Violence
- Did Trump Just Declare War on the American Left?
- What Happened Yesterday Was NOT About "Freedom."
- NEVER FORGET - NEVER FORGIVE THE ROTTEN SAUDIS WHO...
- Be careful not to inadvertently help sainthood Cha...
- Opinion Max Boot Russia’s drone incursion in P...
- JoJo on Trump
- New INC. Magazine Column from Howard Tullman
- Johnson is a Lying Pedo
- Frank Bruni
- The (Not-So-)Interim Docket
- EZRA KLEIN - VERY TIMELY AND IMPORTANT
- WHERE IS PEDO DON?
- Edwin Eisendrath Trump's cabinet is filled with t...
- https://www.threads.com/@auroradrone/post/DORhxlPD...
- The One Danger That Should Unite the U.S. and China
- JoJo
- Ty Cobb
- Trump has turned the Oval Office into a Las Vegas ...
- How Many...
- FORRINERS
- HOWARD TULLMAN JOINS LISA DENT ON WGN RADIO TO DIS...
- TULLMAN COLUMN IN LOOP NORTH NEWS
- NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN
- Trump Train Runs Amok - Weak Stupid Republicans Si...
- More brain worms on the loose
-
▼
September
(27)