Progressives are dehumanising Charlie Kirk even in death

Before the death of Charlie Kirk had even been confirmed, ‘progressive’ ghouls were falling over themselves to blame the victim, and perpetuate their fictional ‘far-right’ boogeyman trope that has brought political tensions in America to boiling point.

Shot dead while hosting a college event for Turning Point USA at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, Charlie Kirk was a victim of what looks at this stage like a political assassination. He was likely targeted because of his popularity and his conservative political and moral beliefs – beliefs that until about five minutes ago were completely mainstream. After Donald Trump himself, Kirk was the most important, effective and famous figure in the conservative movement.

His death does not come out of the blue. It happened after years of violent and hyperbolic rhetoric from the mainstream media and Democratic elites attacking conservatives as evil, Nazi-adjacent threats to the status quo. Indeed, the day before Kirk’s assassination, Connecticut Democratic senator Chris Murphy announced, ‘We’re in a war right now to save this country… so you have to be willing to do whatever is necessary in order to save the country’.

Nothing is beneath these people. After Kirk’s death, ‘progressive’ pundits and assorted online leftists have claimed that Kirk brought this on himself. That he deserves it for espousing ‘controversial’ views. MSNBC political analyst Matthew Dowd said that ‘[Kirk has] been one of the most divisive younger figures, who is constantly sort of pushing this hate speech aimed at certain groups. And I always go back to, hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which lead to hateful actions.’ By hateful thoughts and words, of course, Dowd means any views that challenge his liberal-left worldview.

Moments after news of the shooting broke, Dowd even speculated that perhaps it was a ‘[Kirk] supporter shooting their gun off in celebration’ – a reference to Kirk’s defence of Americans’ right to bear arms.

Dowd was fired by MSNBC soon afterwards. But those thinking that the yes men at MSNBC have finally realised how deranged this loathing of the right has become should think again. On another MSNBC show, former Democratic adviser Jen Psaki called President Trump’s plea for people to stop demonising their opponents as Nazis an ‘escalation’. Psaki clearly wants to carry on treating her political rivals as Hitler reincarnated.

Not that this type of loathing is confined to the US, of course. In Britain, one leftist outlet greeted Kirk’s murder with the headline, ‘Charlie KKKirk’s chickens come home to roost’. That is, he deserved it.

At points, the response has gone beyond gloating. Some pundits are now worrying about some sort of conservative backlash. Katy Tur, NBC News correspondent, asked on air: ‘If you’re in the FBI field office, and you see this sort of stuff bubbling up on line, how worried do you get about somebody taking up the cause of Charlie Kirk?’

And what was the cause of Charlie Kirk? Let him tell us in his own words: ‘When people stop talking, really bad stuff starts. When you stop having a human connection to someone you disagree with, it becomes a lot easier to commit violence.’

That was Kirk’s cause – freedom of speech. The willingness to engage with those you disagree with, rather than demonise them. It is something the overpaid sociopaths populating the media mainstream seem unable to understand.

Alongside the corporate shell game that masquerades as ‘news’, there are also campuses full of teachers and students who are also only too willing to dehumanise conservatives. At Middle Tennessee State University, the assistant dean of students responded to Kirk’s shooting by saying she had ‘zero sympathy’ for him, presumably on account of his views. There are legions of young people in these institutions who share the assistant dean’s views – just as there are some in the UK, too. They think that Kirk’s murder is somehow justified, on account of the fact that he said things they disagree with.

Indeed, just a cursory glance at social media shows there are at this point hundreds, if not thousands, of videos of young people celebrating Kirk’s death. These young people, despicable as they are, are merely the hell spawn of a decrepit and dying establishment that has been demonising its opponents for years.

Not that such viciousness is confined to young liberals. One middle-aged white lady posted a series of TikTok videos saying things like ‘congratulations to Charlie Kirk for becoming the new poster child for gun awareness and violence’, and ‘live by the sword, die by the sword’. She even gives a sassy little laugh as she delivers these hate-filled lines. It’s chilling. Then there’s Brandy Bryant, a transgender ‘comedian’, who on hearing of Kirk’s death posted: ‘Breaking: Charlie Kirk loses gun debate.’

The grim, gloating response from too many so-called progressives obscures the human tragedy here. Charlie Kirk was just 31 years old. He leaves behind his wife, Erika, and their two young children.

It’s time for a reckoning. There are many among America’s cultural elites who need to take a long hard look at themselves. They need to examine what role their own bias and credulity has played in feeding the toxic hybrid of woke ideology and corporate power. And they need to start treating those they disagree with not as beneath contempt, but as worthy of debate, engagement and above all compassion.

Jenny Holland is a former newspaper reporter and speechwriter. Visit her Substack here