On Sept. 10, conservative activist and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk was assassinated while speaking at Utah Valley University. Online reactions either mourned Kirk, condemned his legacy, or decried gun violence. The U.S. Senate passed a National Day of Remembrance for Kirk on Sept. 19 and awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Oct. 14. However, Kirk’s ideals could produce a far more violent society if left unchecked. Conservatives use his death to elevate their morals and censure their opponents, but no one should have to glorify him because of it.
Kirk’s many racist claims through The Charlie Kirk Show included saying “prowling Blacks…target white people” and calling the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “a mistake.” He also argued that minorities “steal a white person’s slot” and Black female politicians like Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson lack “the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.” These reduce their accomplishments and split the U.S. based on prejudice.
Moreover, dozens have lost jobs for criticizing Kirk since his death. The Washington Post fired Global Opinions editor Karen Attiah for highlighting gun violence activists’ double standards and “empty rhetoric.” She only directly referenced Kirk in a quote of his demeaning Black women, but the Post accused her of “gross misconduct” and “disparagement on race.” This attacks minority voices on two levels — Attiah was their last Black full-time opinion columnist, and her firing is yet another example of silencing those Kirk targeted.
Meanwhile, many Republican figures baselessly sanctify Kirk. At his memorial, Florida Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna compared Kirk to late civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. However, Dr. King promoted nonviolent civil disobedience and Kirk’s arguments reinforced inequality. The government can’t punish someone for harmlessly disagreeing with them, especially while using his hate to promote their own bigotry and oppression.
Honoring Kirk fails a prejudiced system’s victims. It’s not harmful to be unhappy that Kirk died, but those who are can’t force others to be, especially when he attacked so many minority groups. Words won’t hurt him, and they certainly won’t support international injustice like his did.
On this note, some argue that the National Day of Remembrance is the same as efforts to honor George Floyd in 2020, a victim of police brutality, which included the never-passed George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. However, Kirk perpetuated the cruelty that killed Floyd. While federal acknowledgement of Floyd would’ve punished police brutality, their tributes to Kirk endorse his attempts to deny Americans human rights.
Lionizing Charlie Kirk and erasing the harm he did does a disservice to both the minorities he targeted and anyone exercising free speech. The public can only fight for that right if it’s able to condemn its own misuse, including hateful speech like Kirk’s that makes a first-world country terribly unsafe.
