I saw Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow speak at his memorial
on Sunday. She was magnificent. She promised to keep Charlie’s mission going. I pray that she is able to. But those are some big shoes to fill…
One never knows for sure beforehand, but I think Charlie Kirk’s assassination
may be something of a tipping point in American politics and culture, or, at a
minimum, an inflection point. Why? Because Charlie wasn’t a radical, he wasn’t
a firebrand, he wasn’t a bomb thrower… No, Charlie was—in a relative sense—a
lamb. And now, that lamb has been slaughtered.
While Charlie was a brilliant speaker, his true genius was
his willingness to engage almost anyone and do so on their terms, using their
own words. We’ve all seen videos of Charlie sitting at a table or standing on a
podium at some random college, engaging with students or activists. Typically,
Charlie would allow the students to ask questions or make an argument and then
respond accordingly. Usually quite brilliantly, always politely.
In all honesty, I sometimes felt bad for his interlocutors,
who were often young and brainwashed and had to stand and have their arguments
dismantled in front of their peers. While it may have done them some good in
the long run, for that moment, it almost certainly didn’t feel like it.
Charlie was easily one of the bravest men on America’s
political and cultural battlefield. Why? Because he made it his stock in trade
regularly to go into the lion’s den, armed only with a microphone and a
brilliant mind for defense. And when I say lion’s den, I mean academia, where
the left has been minting young communists for half a century.
When I was in college in the ’80s and ’90s, when a sliver of
normalcy still remained and the cancer of politics had not infected every
element of life, there was no one doing what Charlie was doing. Thirty years
later, when the left had transformed every aspect of American life, from sports
to media to scouting to Halloween—and, especially, education—into a political
minefield, Charlie went in and engaged with students and professors on their
home turf. He usually came away the victor. He did so utilizing a combination
of facts and the Socratic method that left the person with whom he was engaging
wondering what had just happened, and often humbled.
Charlie was extraordinarily effective, both in engaging with
the public and also, and perhaps more importantly, motivating young people on
campuses across the country to follow his lead, to stand up and engage in
debate from a conservative, patriotic, Christian perspective, something that
had largely been erased from most universities by the early part of the 21st
century.
The vehicle for Charlie’s evangelism of conservative
principles was Turning Point USA, an organization he co-founded in 2012 at the
age of eighteen. A little over a decade later, TPUSA is one of the most
important organizations in the American political landscape, having over 800
college and university chapters across the country and running programs and
summit events every year.
Over that time, Charlie and TPUSA have been responsible for
inspiring millions of young people to throw off the radical leftist
straitjackets that academia sought to keep them in. Indeed, looking at the
shift of young people, particularly young men, to the right, it’s clear that
he was one of the movement’s most important catalysts in propelling Donald
Trump back to the White House in 2024.
Charlie Kirk was attractive, engaging, effective, and brave.
And the left killed him for it because violence is all that the left has to
offer. As Charlie demonstrated every time he took to a podium to speak or a
table to debate, words, eloquently delivered, with passion and supported by
facts, can be a powerful weapon in the battle of ideas and policy. The left had
no good answer to Charlie. Sure, they have passion, and they sometimes have
eloquence, but they rarely have facts or reality on their side, and even less
often, common sense.
Whether it’s rioting and burning down cities across the
country, using mob tactics to intimidate speakers and politicians, or literally
killing their opponents, the left in America has lost its battle for the mind
of the American man...and woman. In the world of ideas, the left has lost the
debate and has nothing left to offer but violence, and the killing of Charlie
Kirk is the ultimate example of exactly that.
Which is why the left might have finally gone too far. It’s
not like they took out some fire-breathing conservative pugilist who used
invective and intimidation as his tools of the trade. No, they took out a man
who was polite, respectful, and fundamentally decent. And despite the left’s
attempts to paint him as a radical purveyor of hate, it is clear to any
objective observer that he was anything but.
They say that the margins drive politics, and that the
hardcore of both sides are largely unmovable in the short term, leaving the
10%-15% in the middle as the targets of intense political messaging. Most of
those people are persuadable, although what persuades them is sometimes
unknown. But what is known is that the assassination of a decent family man,
who welcomed polite discussions with everyone, gets people’s attention,
particularly when it’s in full color video, in gruesome detail. Given that it comes
on the heels of another vicious, bloody murder of an innocent at the hands of a
man who was a product of a leftist-controlled criminal justice system, it will
likely make many of those perennial fence sitters recognize that one side is
about violence and the other about ideas.
Most Americans don’t want violence to be the driving force
in their politics any more than they want it in their lives. President Trump
will never convince people who want to allow murderers to walk among innocents
to support stronger penalties for violent offenders—but then he doesn’t have
to. Charlie’s murder will likely have a sufficient impact that a significant
majority of Americans will recognize that violence cannot be allowed to become
the coin of the realm.
When leftist violence is allowed to percolate, everyone
loses, everywhere, all the time. That was true in the Soviet Union, in Cuba,
Vietnam, Cambodia, and is true today in Venezuela. Few Americans, other than
those associated with Antifa, BLM, and Bluesky, want to see blood in the
streets, political or otherwise. The shock of Charlie Kirk’s murder just might
be the catalyst that lets America regain her footing on the righteous path
that’s been blockaded by the violent thugs on the left.
That would be a fitting legacy for a man who spent most of
his life trying to get Americans to recognize, appreciate, and protect the
gifts that our Founding Fathers left us.
No comments:
Post a Comment