Violence of any kind is unacceptable in politics. The shooting death of Charlie Kirk is a terrible tragedy for his family, for all who loved and admired him, and for this country. I am mourning his loss, not as a like-minded person, but as someone who appreciated his interest in dialogue and debate with people he disagreed with.
Kirk and I disagreed about almost everything. He advocated for Christian Nationalism, deplored the fact that non-whites are an increasing proportion of Americans, opposed gay marriage and gender-affirming care for transgender individuals, and called abortion “murder.” He was skeptical of helping other countries, opposed aid to Ukraine, attacked diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, and defended the right to bear arms, calling it a “God-given right.”
Even though we were on opposite sides of the political spectrum, I appreciated the fact that he wanted to talk about political differences. He said, “If you believe in something, you need to have the courage to fight for those ideas — not run away from them or try to silence them.” (Brainyquote.com) He believed that debate and discussion was the appropriate way to dissent. With respect to his college speaking tours, he said, “We record all of it so that we put [it] on the internet so people can see these ideas collide. When people stop talking, that’s when you get violence. That’s when civil war happens, because you start to think the other side is so evil, and they lose their humanity.” (Chris Stein, Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’, Theguardian.com, Sept 11, 2025)
Some of what Kirk advocated was abhorrent to me. I hear some of his positions and I want to speak out against them. But I totally agree with him that we need to have free debate and discussion. The rhetoric can get pretty nasty at times, the language can be antagonistic and add to our polarization, but that is how our country has been shaped and formed. From the time of our founders through the Civil War and two World Wars, people have disagreed. What we have to do today is to find ways to continue to disagree without violence.
On the day Charlie Kirk was shot, George F. Will wrote:
“Today, American politics is embittered by many disagreements, but not even all of them cumulatively begin to justify the insanely disproportionate furies that so many people on both sides of the metaphoric barricades relish feeling. Perhaps they feel important, even to themselves, only when cloaked in the derivative importance that comes from immersion in apocalyptic politics. Politics too grand to settle for merely keeping the peace that gives congeniality a chance.
Kirk, like Buckley, was a teacher unconfined to a classroom. Anyone is such who argues for a living — who by welcoming interlocutors pays them the compliment of acknowledging the kinship of all serious users of language. It is horrific that nowadays this can be fatal.”
(George F. Will, William F. Buckley Jr. would recognize Charlie Kirk as a kindred spirit, The Washington Post, Sept 11, 2025, washingtonpost.com)
May we find a way to disagree without violence.
Bob, I’m not sure I completely agree with you. CK often said that he wanted to hear other opinions but if you watch his debates, he usually relied on his raised voice and fabricated statistics to make his points.