Charlie Kirk Doesn’t Deserve What’s Happening To Him
I am not here to celebrate the death of Charlie Kirk. I will not, however, engage in the completely unearned celebration of his life that is happening pretty much everywhere in the wake of his murder.
What's happening now would normally be considered inexplicable in any other political climate. But this one is front-loaded to give Donald Trump deference, even if he couldn't care less about Kirk being gunned down while engaged in yet another I'm just asking questions" performance.
Q: My condolences on the loss of your friend Charlie Kirk. How are you holding up?TRUMP: I think very good. And by the way, right there you see all the trucks. They just started construction of the new ballroom for the White House, which is something they've been trying to get for about 150 years.
If you can't read/see the embed, here's the quote of the press conference Q&A with the Commander in Chief:
Q: My condolences on the loss of your friend Charlie Kirk. How are you holding up?
TRUMP: I think very good. And by the way, right there you see all the trucks. They just started construction of the new ballroom for the White House, which is something they've been trying to get for about 150 years.
This is maybe the one time Trump actually seems to be on the correct wavelength. An alt-right podcaster was killed. We all move on after processing the immediate horror of the act. Trump moves on faster than most, given his intense focus on himself. We all should acknowledge a terrible thing has happened, but it's not any different than the hundreds of similar acts of violence that happen in this nation every day.
And the person killed in this act wouldn't have it any other way:
I think it's worth it," he said. I think it's worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It's rational."
Kirk is an acceptable death, according to Charlie Kirk himself. He died doing what he loved: pretending to engage in an honest discussion with whoever decided to grab the other mic.
What Kirk definitely wasn't was a free speech hero, although that's what those aligned with his dishonest take on debate are now claiming with extremely straight and sad faces all over the internet. Let's take a look at [lol] The Free Press, the just asking questions" platform for Bari Weiss and anyone who's willing to work under her masthead:
Kirk was assassinated for those ideals. He was at that college campus in Utah-the very institution meant to be a bastion of freedom of conscience and speech-because he wanted to promote debate. This is the very act that gave birth to this nation, and the only thing that will ensure its survival.
We fear his assassination represents a watershed moment for free expression in this country. We worry that his murder will have a profound chilling effect-that people will shy away from open discussion, that they will avoid honest debate, and that they will turn away from sticking their neck out for fear that engaging with their fellow citizens might mean an engraved bullet will be meant for them.
If none of this provoked a burst of loud, inadvertent laughter, I humbly suggest you may no longer have a soul. Kirk didn't have ideals." He had invective. He didn't cherish open discussion." He just managed to turn his change my mind" shtick into a profitable extension of his innate bigotry. He was just one of hundreds of Trump-associated semi-celebrities who think the First Amendment should protect them from being criticized for being racist, sexist, or... you know, cheering on literal insurrection attempts. But those rights shouldn't be extended to anyone who disagrees with them.
Kirk is only distinguishable from the detritus currently filling the X hole because he managed to make a living by being awful to his fellow human beings. Most people just do it for fun, but Kirk made it a profession.
There was never a chance of changing" Kirk's mind. That was always pretense for unloading on whoever had the misfortune of challenging him on his home field, surrounded by his supporters, and completely devoid of any neutral party that plausibly could decide who did or didn't win this debate.
Minds can be changed. But Kirk only wanted to convert more minds to his side of the issues. His mind, however, would retain its shape, smoothed interminably by choosing to only consider the ideas of bigots even less talented than he was.
This is anecdata but I feel compelled to mention it. I have had my mind changed. I grew up in a devout Christian household and fell in lockstep with my dad, who was a hard-right conservative. I listened to tons of Rush Limbaugh during my formative years. I was convinced that abortions were for sluts, welfare was for the lazy, and Mexicans were dirty thieves. It was only after I exited that home and started actually building relationships with people that I began to understand my beliefs were based on bigots and their projection, rather than anything remotely resembling real life. Within a few years, my views had been changed, prompted by little more than treating other human beings like human beings, rather than caricatures projected on them by rich, white males who insisted on seeing the worst in anyone who didn't look like their reflection in the mirror.
I wouldn't expect multiple pro sports teams to hold a moment of silence for any YouTube celebrity or TikTok influencer, no matter how they died. I wouldn't expect multiple entities to fire people for refusing to treat Kirk's killing like a national tragedy. I definitely wouldn't expect people from other countries to be punished for daring to speak the actual truth about Charlie Kirk. But that's what's happening.
Mexican congressional staffer Salvador Ramirez was forced to resign after saying these extremely accurate things about Kirk while appearing on the Milenio news network:
I think if Charlie Kirk lived, he may like what I am about to say, because what I am about to say is very anti-woke'," Ramirez facetiouslysaid. He was given a spoonful of his own chocolate. They gave a spoonful to someone who promoted the use of weapons. They gave a spoonful to someone who was financed by the National Rifle Association - a political association that is of the extreme right, pro-Trump, of the most radical wing of the Republicans."
Ramirez added that Turning Point USA was an anti-rights, anti-LGBT - practically anti-women - movement".
All of this is true. And pointing out that it's more than a little ironic that Kirk was shot after advocating so vociferously for unfettered gun rights is just stating the obvious. It's not mocking the dead.
What's happening now - this outpouring of sympathy for an unsympathetic person coupled with claims this will somehow chill" free speech - is abhorrent. Kirk didn't care about free speech. He only cared about pushing his beliefs. That's why he formed Turning Point USA. That's why he courted gun money and aligned himself with Donald Trump. That's why he built a small fortune by attacking minorities, the poor, LGBTQ+ people, and anyone who chose to defend those being bullied by Kirk and his followers.
If Kirk is going to be memorialized, it should be done in the spirit of free speech that he (pretended) to endorse. Here's Elizabeth Spiers, saying what needs to be said about someone who died tragically, but definitely is not a tragic figure worthy of the praise he's being showered with now that he's dead:
Charles James Kirk, 31, died on Wednesday from a gunshot to the neck at a Utah Valley University campus event just as he was trying to deflect a question about mass shootings by suggesting they were largely a function of gang violence. He died with a net worth of$12 million, which he made by espousing horrific and bigoted views in the name of advancing Christian nationalism. The foundation of his empire was the group he cofounded and led, Turning Point USA, which is a key youth-recruitment arm of the MAGA movement. Kirk was able to launch Turning Point at the age of 18 because he received money from Tea Party member Bill Montgomery, right-wing donor Foster Feiss, and his own father, also a prolific right-wing donor. He was an unrepentant racist, transphobe, homophobe, and misogynist who often wrapped his bigotry in Bible verses because there was no other way to pretend that it was morally correct. He had children, as do many vile people.
This is Kirk's legacy. There's no free speech advocacy left unfinished. There's no contribution to a more unified nation. There's no bravery to be admired. There's just the senseless killing of a person who managed to spin hate into gold. Honoring him in death grants credence to the hideous beliefs he espoused. The only thing separating him from the average racist is generational wealth.