The Ugliness Runs Deep

The ugly response to Kirk's death runs deeper than most of us think

It has been a little while since I put pen to paper, Beside the everyday stresses of life, the thing keeping me from writing my thoughts down has been the lingering sense of dread I’ve felt ever since Charlie Kirk assassinated. This was not inconsequential. I know it seems odd to suggest that folk may consider something like this to be without consequence - meaning it won’t change our lives in any meaningful way for now - but believe me those people exist.

Not only are they real, in fact, but they exist among others who also believe Kirk deserved it. And yes, they do believe that. I’ve read every argument under the sun in the last three weeks for why those tacitly celebrating Kirk’s murder should not be “forced to mourn him.” But that’s not the argument anyone is making – at least, not anyone I’ve met, read, heard. What I have heard and witnessed is a chorus of people from across the U.S. (and even the U.K.) glorifying Kirk’s murder in any way they can without explicitly endorsing his death.

“He shouldn’t have been killed but, he did say…”

“Murder is wrong, but I’m not sad he’s gone.”
“The murderer wasn’t left wing”
“Right-wing extremism is far more pervasive!”

When, exactly, did we lose our humanity?

I’m hesitant to argue this all over again, and to do so this time against myself in an op-ed, but I simply must. I have found that anyone claiming Kirk “did say this about…” is, almost in every instance, wrong. The scale at which Kirk’s words have been misrepresented is truly alarming, while also not surprising in the least. I hate that I even have to qualify this, but I was never a Charlie Kirk-style conservative and never will be. I am more liberal than he was on a whole bunch of key issues. But I also know what it’s like to have my words taken out of context, and what has happened to Kirk is so blatant it reveals to anyone who takes five minutes to read his words in full that those spreading the lie are doing so deliberately. They are not misinformed, they are not naïve. They are, for whatever reason, acting in bad faith.

I could write an entire book on the different kinds of people who act in bad faith and why, but I think a good explanation of the vast majority engaging in this kind of trickery could be categorised as follows. These are people who have spent the last five to twenty years advocating for increasingly radical social policies that do not reflect the views of most Americans (or, indeed, Brits). Throughout the fight they’ve witnessed politics descend not just into the gutter, but to a point where it can no longer honestly be described as partisanship. It is full-blown political factionalism. And as with most wars, there are defectors. Some see sense and may switch sides.

As a side note, I must say – and I will do so without providing a study to support it, sorry – that I get the impression more are moving away from the progressive left to the center (or the right) than vice versa. Certainly, those who were previously non-political are increasingly leaning right more than they are left. But, among those who are already active, it seems to me that there is a larger trend of people moving from left to right than the other way around, and that can be a good and bad thing. I mention this, though, because while the majority don’t defect – much like most soldiers – they tend to do it with a bang when it does actually happen.

Soviet Air Force pilot Viktor Belenko famously defected to the West in 1976 after he flew his Mig-25 “Foxbat” from Vladivostok airspace to Japan. After crash landing at a civilian airport, his jet provided a valuable, and history-making insight into an almost mythical Soviet fighter that the West did not yet fully understand. He defected with a bang. Much like J.K. Rowling. And Graham Linehan. And a host of other high-profile leftists who were forced to admit that their side, frankly, has gone a bit bad.

But like these military men, many on the left don’t defect simply because they can’t. Many more like Belenko would have done what he did had the risk and the consequences not been so earth-shattering. Today’s progressives, sadly, are now forced to lie in the bed they made. They cannot defect because doing so would mean admitting they got something wrong. They cannot admit that politics was made needlessly ugly, and that non-progressives are more routinely smeared as “extremists,” because doing so would expose them to the same kind of assaults.

Conservatives, meanwhile, do not typically fear their livelihoods or safety if they ever decide to jump ship or criticize their own side.

So why am I telling you all this? In the wake of Kirk’s assassination and seeing people I know and respected tacitly cheering his death, I have come to realise that a larger percentage of my “adversaries” act in bad faith than I had originally thought. And that’s not to say even all of those acting in bad faith are inherently bad. Even among them, I think many are so terrified and conflicted that they simply do not know what to do. How many people, I wonder, started with good intentions and found themselves stuck in a movement that punishes dissent? How many continue parroting the same old lines, despite seeing the damage being done, knowing that they face the same kind of punishment and derision they inflict on others if they take a step back?

No, I’m not defending those people. But I do think I have identified a fairly significant dynamic among today’s radicals.

And if those people feel as though they can’t leave, the only solution is some kind of offramp. It is not mockery and derision in response. It is not snarky arguments and memes. And no, it’s not an olive branch to extremists who want you dead, either. It’s an offramp; one that rewards critical thought, honesty, decency, and civility.

Next time I chime in here, I’ll expand more on the form I think it could take.