Charlie Kirk, myth making, and violence

I kind of have to address the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk at a Utah college campus yesterday. It has sent shockwaves through American political discourse, ofcourse. The it's the aftermath reveals more about our current political moment as the tragedy itself.

Kirk's death represents an inexcusable act of violence that liberals and conservatives have both condemned en masse across party lines. But not everyone see this obvious fact. The additional response from conservatives has illuminated deep fissures in how we view events and remember public figures. Some of these lay the groundwork for political retaliation.

Immediate calls for war and retribution

The response from some prominent right-wing figures was swift and incendiary. As an article in Mother Jones documented, conservative figures immediately began calling for retribution against "the left" before any suspect was even identified (by Anna Merlan, Julianne Mcshane, and Kiera Butler).

Tesla CEO Elon Musk immediat4ly declared to his 225 million followers on X(itter) that "The Left is the party of murder," while far-right activist Laura Loomer demanded the Trump administration "shut down, defund, & prosecute every single Leftist organization."

No such outcry met the actual political assassination of former Minnesota Democratic speaker Melissa Hortman (and her dog FFS).

The rhetoric quickly escalated to calls for violence. Christian nationalist pastor Joel Webbon told his followers that Trump had been "appointed by Providence" and commanded "to be a TERROR to those who do evil." Former administration official William Wolfe declared that "the goal for Republicans in the next ten years shouldn't just be to win elections, but to destroy the Democrat Party entirely and salt the earth underneath it."

Carthago delende est? That's a bit extreme, but they are who they are. Fascist thugs.

Institutional power mobilized

According to an article in Democracy Docket by Jacob Knutson, President Trump aslo seized upon Kirk's killing tojustify a crackdown on political opponents. Before authorities even had a suspect in custody, Trump issued sweeping threats against undefined "organizations" that allegedly support political violence.

"My administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity," Trump declared from the Oval Office. A top MAGA leader was more specific, calling for the administration to “prosecute every single leftist organization.

Conservative activist Christopher Rufo invoked historical FBI infiltration tactics, stating it was time to "infiltrate, disrupt, arrest, and incarcerate all of those who are responsible for this chaos." , Trump also neglected to mention recent political violence against Democrats, including the assassination of Hortman.

Memory wars and the erasure of history

The immediate effort to sanitize Kirk's controversial legacy is most rankling. Charlie Kirk did not deserved to be killed, but he was a vile human. As documented by Oliver Willis at Daily Kos, mainstream media outlets and political figures across the spectrum have engaged in historical whitewashing. Trump announced he would award Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom, while Democratic governors ordered flags flown at half-staff.

Major news outlets followed suit. Ezra Klein in the The New York Times columnists praised Kirk for "practicing politics the right way." and CNN's Brian Stelter portrayed him as someone who "invited people to try and prove him wrong."

This rush to memorialize Kirk overlooks his actual record of inflammatory rhetoric. Willis extensively documents Kirk's history of racist, antisemitic, and anti-LGBTQ+ statements. In 2023, Kirk said, "It's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment"—ironic given his own death by gun violence.

Kirk promoted the racist "great replacement" conspiracy theory, attacked Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy as a "myth," and claimed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had become an "anti-white weapon." He said Black History Month wasn't "worth the kind of full month that it is" and blamed gun violence in Chicago on "a lack-of-father problem in the Black community."

Even in the moment before his death, he was blaming Blacks for gun violence. (If the killer turns out to be Black, I will eat my hat.)

His antisemitic rhetoric included references to "Jewish dollars" funding "Cultural Marxist ideas," while his anti-LGBTQ+ activism included comparing gender-affirming care to Nazi crimes against humanity. During a 2024 discussion of gay rights, Kirk referenced biblical passages about stoning gay people to death as "God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters."

Kirk also pushed COVID-19 conspiracy theories, calling vaccine requirements "medical apartheid" and falsely claiming 1.2 million people died from vaccinations. After Trump's 2020 election loss, he called for Mike Pence to reject Electoral College votes and violate the Constitution.

Now that's a legacy of ignorance of hate. Nothing to eulogize at all.

And now shit gets tense

The conservative calls for retribution arealreeady bearing fruit. As I write this, HCBUs in Atlanta and across the country are under a shelter in place order or have received threats (UPDATE: shelter in place now lifted, but still).

Charlie Kirk's death was a tragedy that no one should celebrate or justify. Political violence has no place in American democracy, regardless of the victim's beliefs or actions. However, condemning violence does not require us to forget history or abandon critical evaluation of public figures' legacies.

The convergence of using Kirk's death to justify political persecution while rehabilitating his public image sets an alarming precedent. When prominent figures call for destroying political parties and using state power to "crush" opponents, they abandon democratic norms for authoritarian tactics.

We can simultaneously condemn a murder and while maintain our intellectual honesty about the ideas and movements that shape our political landscape. The real test of our political maturity lies not in how we respond to tragedy with emotion. It lies in our ability to maintain our commitment to truth and democratic values.

Non in cautus futuri.