On Charlie Kirk: all he did to the left was debate – and win
I keep hearing in the MSM that Charlie Kirk was “divisive” and “polarizing,” two of their favorite words for any figure on the right. What do these pundits really mean when they call Kirk that? They mean that he said things with which they disagree. That’s the “divisive” part. The “polarizing” part means he succeeded in convincing some young people that the leftist point of view might not make as much sense as they’d previously thought.
Oh, and he was up-front about being a Christian. And pro-Israel. And a proponent of what not long ago was so basic as to be universally accepted, but is now considered by the left to be “hate speech” – that there are only two sexes and that, when born as either one or the other, a person cannot switch.
The left has long been about stifling free speech once their own numbers reach a certain critical mass. Because of many decades of the leftist Gramscian march though our cultural and educational institutions, that mass was reached some time ago and the left is determined to silence voices on the other side. For quite a while, cancel culture was the method. But that segued into murder, and the killing of people who are dangerous to the left because of their voices or because of their stances or jobs is now not only accepted and excused by a broad segment of the left, but applauded and celebrated.
Many people have pointed out that there’s quite a bit of that going on at various social media sites such as Reddit, which comes as no surprise.
Kirk was especially dangerous to the left because he was so effective on campus, with young people. His work there may even have been responsible (at least in part) for putting Donald Trump over the top in 2024:
Charlie Kirk just went around debating college kids who had likely never heard a viewpoint outside the narrow ones they had been taught. He used words, ideas, that’s it. And someone found this so threatening that they decided to kill him for it.
— Peter Hague (@peterrhague) September 10, 2025
Kirk also was unfailingly polite, respectful, and good-natured when he argued. I don’t know how he did it, but he did it with earnestness and a smile and never seemed to get angry. And yet it hasn’t kept the left from characterizing him as hateful. Fortunately, his videos remain to tell a different tale.
This death is less like an assassination of an officeholder and more like a terrorist attack, because it seems meant to frighten and silence rather than to stop someone in a governmental position. Was the killer Antifa, pro-Hamas, anti-Christian, trans – who and what and exactly why? While it’s theoretically possible that Kirk wasn’t killed by a leftist, I think it’s extremely likely that he was. But at any rate, many leftists are celebrating his death.
This pro-assassination culture on the left has been going on for many years, but Trump’s tenure seems to have caused the left to escalate it exponentially. I noticed it from the beginning of Trump’s first term, when suddenly I was hearing many references by some Democrats I know (not even leftists, by the way) expressing their wish for Trump to die or be killed. They said it without apology or any seeming sense that what they said was wrong. The desire had already been normed, or even seen as a sign of virtue.
A few months ago, someone I’ve known since childhood (although we’re not especially close) told me that if she had a terminal disease she’d get a gun and try to kill Trump. Fortunately, she seems healthy enough. But it didn’t sound like a joke; not that she would do it even if ill, but she was expressing a very strong wish. And I can attest to the fact that, until Trump was elected, she was politically moderate.
It will take quite some time for the effects of Kirk’s death to become apparent. But I think the author of this piece, that appeared in The Federalist, has a good point when she writes, “Kirk wasn’t just assassinated. He was also martyred.” I wouldn’t be at all surprised if opposition to Kirk’s strong Christian beliefs, which formed a core part of his identity, was a significant part of the assassin’s motive for killing him.
And yes, the assassin did evil and many on the left advocate evil – including my old friend. It’s shocking, but true, and – as often happens with evil – one of the most shocking things is that they think they’re advocating good.
Many of you are old enough to remember the assassinations of the 1960s. I certainly am. There was a feeling of things spiraling out of control. But this seems worse, and I’ll tell you why: the left has grown stronger and more numerous rather than weaker. And social media is a very potent factor in its spread. Charlie Kirk was instrumental as a counterforce, and he will be very sorely missed.
I would submit Kirk’s polite, upbeat disposition was a major component of the leftist rage against him. His style of engaging students of a political stripes with patience and civility was very similar to Ben Shapiro. But Shapiro can come off as snide and condescending at times. Not Kirk. He was an indefatigable ‘happy warrior.’
And he had a beautiful family. He was the epitome of the normalcy that leftists hate: a young, straight white male with a wife and kids, confident and articulate in his conservatism but unceasingly polite and cheerful.
Nicholas Lissack:
https://x.com/NicholasLissack/status/1966166146853515530
Image of Abaraonye’s “celebratory” post at link. Guess that debate pasting hurt a bit.
An important question: WHY HAS THE LEFT GROWN STRONGER SINCE THE 1960S??
I think violence has become widespread, especially in the MSM, and has become rather ordinary. It has become cheap, routine, at all levels. and once that monster, violence, is out of its cage, it cannot readily be reincarcerated.
Historically, in the past 100-150 years, it has been the LEFT which has been violent.
I think highly of your mastery of the English language. But even by your standards, this was a very well written post.
BIG BADGER HUZZAH!
Show of hands for death penalty for Charlie Kirk’s killer?
Why not?
I must say, my X feed is awash is what might be termed “The Great Self-outing of the Vile Political Left”, top to bottom, stem to stern. It’s actually an overwhelming tsunami of hatefulness exposed. And consequences attending in real time.
Last month I spent 22 hours listening to the accounts recorded in Svetlana Alexievich’s Secondhand Time spotlighting people’s lives in the aftermath of the disintegration of the former Soviet Union. It was the most astounding thing I’ve ever encountered. Very clearly once the Bolsheviks took power, lining up as the oppressor or the oppressed made up the societal structure. What was stunning was the number of people that suffered horrifying atrocities and yet held to the communist tenants and even in the aftermath wished for a Stalin or Lenin to return. I bring this up because our political/cultural adversaries do not recognize it but celebrating and longing for the death of your opponent would seem to eventually lead to the kind of place that the USSR was and as I wrote–it was much worse than I ever imagined. Even when the country shut down for Covid–how quick people were to want to enact powers to disenfranchise or punish people (me and my family) from being able to work, receive medical care etc because we wouldn’t fall in line. This is a very bad trajectory. “Who goes Nazi?” was a parlor game until it wasn’t. No need to play–just listen to what people say and watch what they do.
Two sexes from conception. Gender (i.e. sex-correlated attributes) evolve thereafter, observable directly from birth and later (e.g. sexual orientation).
Khalid Sheik Muhammed still lives and breathes today, Irish Otter. I object.
The Left always claims that anyone who disagrees with them is either controversial, extreme or divisive.
Most people want to go with the flow.
This is how the Left enforces party discipline. You must agree or you are out of the mainstream.
1. What is it about Trump that drives people insane? I can’t figure it out. He speaks in an unusual way, but so what? He has had a checkered sex life, but so did Bill Clinton.
He’s super effective in getting things done. That’s for sure.
2. “the leftist Gramscian march though our cultural and educational institutions”
And Pete Buttigieg’s dad was the editor of the Gramsci academic journal. That stuff has to be burned into his head. He worked on it as a teenager. But he’s never been asked about it.
I saw Charlie speak a couple of times at TPUSA’s Amfest in Phoenix. He seemed like a genuinely nice person and the speakers and presenters at Amfest represented a diverse spectrum of conservative thought. As you mentioned, he was a devout Christian and yet he had representatives from the Atlas Society (followers of Ayn Rand) at Amfest. He was willing to talk and debate with everyone and seemed to be sincerely interested in other opinions. I feel the MAGA movement is fracturing and Charlie was one person who could pull everyone together. I don’t know who replaces him.
The amount that he was able to accomplish in his too short life is amazing. His efforts at getting out the vote in key swing states very easily could have been the difference in the last election.
The normalizing of violence to shut down speech is deeply troubling and I don’t see how to make common cause with those who are celebrating Charlie’s death. What can you say to someone who believes that the proper response to speech with which they disagree is murder?
There are some who believe that the violence on the left is a provocation to get a more violent response from the right, which can then be used as an excuse for more government control. But I think it’s to simply get people to be too scared to express their opinions. I’ve already heard from some on the right who will no longer do large public events.
I was so happy when Trump managed to win last year despite all the odds. It felt like the darkness that was descending might be beginning to lift. But it seems that we are heading to a much darker place.
SCOTTtheBADGER:
Thanks.
Khalid Sheik Muhammed still lives and breathes today, Irish Otter. I object.
Good point. Okay, another show of hands for KSM’s execution?
neo wrote:
It escalates in direct proportion to their opponents’ effectiveness. That’s how it appears to me, at least from Nixon to today.
Rush Limbaugh’s security must have been very good.
Glenn Beck openly talks about his security detail.
Matt Walsh, Brett Kavanaugh…
The very first Republican President was assassinated.
Regarding Kirk’s death and a sense of martyrdom; I have a strong feeling about that with Iryna Zarutska also. The images of her are akin to Michelangelo’s pieta.
The amount of people on twitter calling out people for firing for their vile responses has seemed to pick up as the day has gone on and where once about 10-15 years ago I probably would have opposed a lot of this now it’s just game on when they tell you who they are believe them.
It’s also very illustrative of the crazy left base how many of these idiots are teachers, health care workers and low level government bureaucrats.
suddenly I was hearing many references by some Democrats I know (not even leftists, by the way) expressing their wish for Trump to die or be killed.
My father,a much-decorated Vietnam veteran of 82 years, said – before the election – “I wish I could blow him up.”
I agree with SCOTTtheBADGER. Neo succinctly explains perspectives I have seen nowhere else.
@ Jamie – I can understand your father’s comment because his generation grew up in the shadow of WWII, and, if he is a consumer of the “mainstream (regime) media” like most of his contemporaries, then he has internalized that Trump is Literally Hitler, and his response, with that belief, is perfectly logical.
Wrong, but logical.
The Left and its Democrat enablers have a LOT to answer for.
@ SCOTTtheBADGER & Alan F: motion seconded and carried by acclamation.
What AesopFan wrote just above this (8:35 pm).
Mark Hemingway has an excellent post up.
Not advocating any kind of violence or vengeance, but the just retribution necessary so that at least some of the Left’s unhinged behavior is at least toned down, if not stopped (probably never going to stop the Deep Believers, but maybe the Useful Idiots will be deterred.)
https://thefederalist.com/2025/09/11/the-left-has-never-been-held-accountable-for-political-violence-and-that-must-change/
An expression I used to hear a lot, not so much lately: “wedge issue.” It appeared to mean and issue that inconveniently was persuasive to a large fraction of the left, enough to split their ranks, and therefore one that should not be mentioned any more. It’s clearly divisive and polarizing to exploit a wedge issue.
expressing their wish for Trump to die or be killed
They have been assimilated by the Borg. Most people easily become part of a group, and their behavior and beliefs are determined by the group. It is a aspect of human nature, we are a pack species. What people are as individuals can be very different from what they are as group members. Few remain individuals when part of a group, I would posit that most can’t. It is a quality unrelated to intelligence.
I’ve been looking for this perspective and not seen it elsewhere. The core issue is whether the left is willing to share the country with dissenters from its ideology. Over the last 15 years or so, the answer seems to be no, especially after yesterday.
Charlie Kirk wasn’t killed because he spoke. He was killed because our children listened.
— Cicero
In a sense. The thing is that the upper class Boomers, the hippies of the 60s, are the dominant elder generation now, and setting the overall tone. That subset of the Boom generation is lefty, and they are also the upper class educated types who make up a disproportionately influential subgroup.
A lot of people are comparing the violence and tension now to the 60s, and it’s a valid comparison because it’s the same argument. The same culture war. It went dormant in the 80s and 90s and broke out again in the 2000s.
(This is a repeating historical pattern, BTW.)
One of the worrisome things about this is how many right-wingers are saying stupid stuff and proposing stupid responses, stuff I’m pretty sure Kirk would not approve of. Rage makes stupid, and the Lefties would love for our stupid fringe to take the wheel the turn this back into a liability for us rather than them.
And in some cases, of course, I’m sure the raging ‘right wing’ tweets urging Stupid are lefty false flag, too.
–IrishOtter49
I’m a death penalty abolitionist, because I do not trust the authorities to reliably get it right, or even to always be acting in good faith, and you can’t reverse a mistake with the death penalty. So I would reserve its use only to those situations where it is a necessity, which is rare.
I hold to that even in extreme cases like this. When emotions are running high, that’s the time to stay icy calm and avoid making mistakes.
What is it about Trump? Nothing.
That is, it’s nothing about Donald Trump per se. Remember that before there was Trump Derangement Syndrome, there was Bush Derangement Syndrome, W generated the same loathing hate on the Left.
(And let us honestly admit that it cuts both ways to some extent. A relative of mine, a loving and kind woman, used to sometimes comment that she wished Obama dead. The Left is far worse about it but tribalism is a human trait.)
What generates the hate is the heresy Trump is promoting. I say heresy because Leftism is a religion in effect, at least the social Left, and Trump is perceived as a threat to it, and the emotional instinct to hate and revile threats to the Tribe emerges.
It’s not Trump qua Trump. If Trump had never run for president, they’d still consider him Cool.
ANYONE who is a threat to the Left’s social dominance or the bipartisan establishment’s political and economic power is going to generate that sort of hate.
BTW, here’s an example of what I mean by ‘don’t do Stupid’. (I’m being charitable by calling it Stupid rather than something worse than that).
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-lawmaker-has-extreme-plan-for-those-who-belittled-charlie-kirk-s-death/ar-AA1Mn29y?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=68c39a8b08e541e784c7376bb6249e80&ei=21
Talk about playing into the opposition’s hands…
HC68 (11:45 pm), Trump is even “worse” than a heretic: he’s an apostate.
As AesopFan and perhaps others have pointed out above, to advocate for Trump’s assassination is 100% reasonable *IF* you believe that he is in the process of implementing a fascist regime. One of the first reactions I remember from a leftist in 2016, before the election, was his insistence that “the threat is existential.” Well, if you really and truly believe that, then Trump’s death can only be a good thing.
Based on her social media, if Iryna Z lived a couple weeks longer, she would also be cheering Kirk’s death. But thanks to that mindset, she sat where she did on the train.
HC68, I don’t think government-led banning of leftists gloating over Charlie’s murder will ever happen. I hope not. One of our guaranteed freedoms is the freedom to be stupid.
However, there is, I hear, a website which was put up within 24 hours where people can post links to hateful leftist posts about the assassination on social media. Some of those posts are by identifiable government or educational employees, on their official media, and people are being fired.
HC68 @11:45,
It’s solely because Trump is effective in pushing back. The Left’s hatred is directly proportional to an opponent’s effectiveness. They even started attacking Teslas, inanimate objects*, when Elon Musk became an effective educator on Leftist raiding of the treasury and began eliminating their funding.
*As infants do when throwing a tantrum.
Bauxite @11:16,
I think you’ve summed up the core issue. It’s not the disagreement, per se; Reagan and O’Neill disagreed. Clinton and Gingrich disagreed. But both sides were tolerant of the other and those who held opposing views.
Reports are that the shooter’s Father turned him in.
https://nypost.com/2025/09/12/us-news/we-have-him-trump-says-suspect-in-custody-for-charlie-kirk-assassination/
The left stream media is now claiming that both sides are equally violent. This is a complete inversion of reality, a lie. I haven’t seen any Republicans threatening their opponents with violence like I have seen the democrats.
I “get,” although I do not accept, the left’s calling Kirk a “homophobe” and “transphobe.” These are their invented terms for people who express traditional Christian ethical teaching, which of course are not actually phobias.
But I don’t know where their charge of “white supremacy” comes from. I have seen no evidence that Kirk ever preached anything like that.
Engaging in discourse is verboten by demonkrats / leftists / socialists / communists (but I repeat myself) because alternative views to the leftist world-view are considered heresy.
Long ago, being burned alive would have been acceptable punishment if one expressed heretical views. Today, it’s far easier and quicker just to shoot dead the miscreant and in doing so, gain the approval of the liberal / socialist / demonkrat group-think-body.
Democrats, in outwardly and repeatedly portraying conservatives as Hitler, fascists, white supremacist’s , colonialists and responsible (still !!) for slavery, as well as suggesting that the “oppressed” should “take to the streets,” and “take out” Trump, have implicitly (explicitly ?) encouraged the notion that any and all means are acceptable to eliminate the “enemy.”
Violence is part and parcel of being a leftist / socialist / communist and for many demonkrats as well.
So the assassin has been found and arrested after his father turned him in. Apparently the assassin confessed his culpability after the father, who had been alerted by the pastor of the church which the family attended (unknown if that included the assassin) that he recognized the assassin from all the photos on line. Father was a lifelong member of the LEO community and turned his son in to authorities. Looking at the assassin’s photos posted on line, he looks completely anodyne; unassumng, non-threatening and nobody to whom you would pay a second glance should you pass him on the street. He had been politicized (leftist, of course) by his on line presence, according to his family members and had expressed animosity toward Kirk, whom he described as “full of hate.” I suspect the assassin was on some form of psychotropic drug, ritalin or some such thing, but who knows? What he did seems to me to be proof that the internet propagandizing in which the left and its media supporters participate is very, very effective. Parents, be warned.
All credit to the parents. This has to be the hardest thing they’ve ever done, but they did what was right.
Actually, the killer lived in a mansion with his Republican family.
BJ, when you find evidence that his parents knew about his assassination plan beforehand, or encouraged his violent new beliefs, let us know.
Cicero on September 11, 2025 at 5:24 pm said:
An important question: WHY HAS THE LEFT GROWN STRONGER SINCE THE 1960S??
It seems to me that in our secular time, people turn towards worship of the state. And there is a tendency to think the state can solve one’s problems.
Plato, Euthyphro
Evidently this accused assassin-murderer was radicalized in University. Wonder whether he read Euthyphro there? Don’t bother. He didn’t.
I just put up this post about the suspect’s capture.
Ray on September 12, 2025 at 9:34 am said:
The left stream media is now claiming that both sides are equally violent. This is a complete inversion of reality, a lie. I haven’t seen any Republicans threatening their opponents with violence like I have seen the democrats.
The left can’t win the debate, hence they rely upon cancel culture (this is just the natural extension of that).
The left’s power lies in its control of institutions. As individuals they tend towards the pathetic, particularly among white leftists. They don’t have good debaters because they lack truth. The right has many skilled spokesmen, on different levels, and this includes sane lefties like Joe Rogan and others. The fact Rogan is essentially on our side instead of theirs is because he goes with the truth over the narrative so even though he started out as a Bernie Bro he ended up supporting Trump.
I would submit Kirk’s polite, upbeat disposition was a major component of the leftist rage against him. His style of engaging students of a political stripes with patience and civility was very similar to Ben Shapiro. But Shapiro can come off as snide and condescending at times. Not Kirk. He was an indefatigable ‘happy warrior.’
Ackler:
Quite so.
I was unfamiliar with Charlie Kirk but now I’ve that I’ve watched him, I saw a man of patience and civility and good will, who sincerely put into practice the best aspects of spirited public debate in a democracy.
The current woke left is completely ill-equipped to engage in such debate. To make up for this, they got used to shouting down, canceling and deplatforming to avoid having to persuade people.
But now that’s not working so well, so they’ve upped the ante to violence and murder.
If they thought they would silence the movement, they were mistaken
‘If our god is for us, who can be against us’
The website Kate mentioned is active now, and has a huge number of submissions already which is good and bad: good that people are disgusted at the foulness enough to send the posts to the site; bad that so many people are making the posts in the first place.
https://www.charliesmurderers.com
I scanned through the first page. Not surprisingly, many of them repeat the same few canards of what Charlie said, clearly from hearsay (same as happened with Trump, despite continual debunking) and with none of the context that explains what he meant. Obviously none of them actually attended any of his events or read his work.
Quite a few chortled at the “karma” of his being shot because of his support of the Second Amendment, which on one occasion included an easily misconstrued statement about the potential cost of a few lives to maintain those rights.
Nothing from them about the socialist maxim that “you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.”
Of course, the number of eggs broken by the Left is in the tens of millions and counting.
One response that I saw on a blog post noted that we accept a “reasonable” number of traffic deaths to maintain the privilege of driving, and the same with almost any risk of living. You just aren’t supposed to say that out loud.
@ miguel > “If they thought they would silence the movement, they were mistaken”
A Fox news segment I saw stated exactly that, showing videos of the many vigils around the country where people unfamiliar with Kirk are learning about him, and then looking back into his career and positions — and liking what they see.
“If you strike me down, Darth, I will become more powerful than you can imagine.”
That line resonates because it’s a statement of the Messianic archetype — although I don’t think that was the intention.
The early Christian martyrs, and many later ones continuing to this day in places like China and Africa, were willing to accept the “cost of a few lives” — theirs — as the price of spreading the Gospel of Salvation.