Posted on Sunday, September 14, 2025
|
by David P. Deavel
|
0 Comments
|
The brutal public assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk was truly horrible. Because of the ubiquity of smartphone cameras, graphic footage of the shooting was immediately available all over the internet—as was the public celebration and justification of the murder by thousands and thousands of individuals.
If we can hope for any good coming from the terrible murder of Charlie Kirk, it ought to be a movement to stop openly expressing hate for each other and openly wishing for or celebrating their deaths.
This is a major problem for liberals. To see a 31-year-old man with a wife, two children, and who is a hero to millions of young people have his life snuffed out is frightening, infuriating, and saddening. That the alleged killer is a young man of radical left beliefs who was, according to liberal outlet Axios, in a romantic relationship with his transgender roommate, again emphasizes the destructiveness of the ideologies being pushed by liberals.
Yet, perhaps even more traumatic than the heinous crime has been to see it justified and even celebrated over and over in public and on social media by the kind of liberals whose supposed calling cards are “love” and “tolerance.”
In the Atlantic, liberal Jonathan Chait bragged that Democratic politicians and important figures were condemning the assassination. He said that the horrific internet celebrations of death were coming from random individuals, which shows “that the [Democratic] Party has a healthy culture of marginalizing illiberal and violent sentiments.”
That is nice, but it is a huge problem that the people making up the Democrats’ base do have those illiberal and violent sentiments. An article on YouGov about recent polling shows that nearly one in five (18%) of liberals think political violence can be justified, while only 6% of conservatives say the same. Similarly, 24% of very liberal respondents think it acceptable to publicly celebrate deaths, while only 3% of very conservative respondents do.
Those shocking statistics have been on full display this week. We’ve seen how many liberals felt comfortable rejoicing in Kirk’s death under their own names—to no objection by those same politicians. A nurse from Detroit posted on social media, “God he got the day he deserved.” Down the road, a University of Michigan education professor offered, “Even if you believe violence isn’t the answer, it is a solution, especially to the violent conditions and violent rhetoric spewed by empowered people that create them.”
A teacher from Fort Bend County, Texas (where this author lives), offered his own idea for the next “solution”: “Chaya Raichik [Libs of TikTok account creator] should catch a neck shot.” And when nurse Lexi Kuenzle expressed horror at the news of Kirk’s death at her hospital in New Jersey, a surgeon replied, in front of eight other nurses and a patient on a stretcher: “I hate Charlie Kirk. He had it coming. He deserved it.”
One can find myriad examples of this kind of public vitriol everywhere. And while someone like Jonathan Chait can say it doesn’t matter, the problem is that it very much does. Handing over one’s children to teachers or trusting medical professionals with the health and lives of one’s family is almost impossible when these figures are signaling their happiness and approval at the brutal murder of someone just like us. Even seeing one’s neighbors and acquaintances publicly celebrating murder is destructive.
Many conservatives are now turning the tables on the liberals who spent a decade canceling them for their age-old tweets or comments in private messages, casting doubt on whether men can become women, whether George Floyd was murdered, or whether abolishing the police was a good idea. While some may not like this version of “cancel culture,” it is inaccurate to compare it to the cancel culture wielded against conservatives. Unlike conservatives who objected to being forced to use made-up pronouns, liberals expressing public approval and celebration of political murder crosses a dangerous moral and civic line that can only lead to more violence.
Given what happened to Lexi Kuenzle, it appears such pressure tactics are necessary. When Kuenzle complained to the management at her New Jersey hospital and posted on social media about the surgeon who thought Kirk “deserved” assassination, it was she who was brought in the next day, informed she was suspended without pay, and emailed by her own union representative that she might be fired. Apparently, it’s a fireable offense to object to celebrations of death, but not a fireable offense to utter them.
Kuenzle has since filed a lawsuit. We hope she’ll be successful. The hospital has deleted its X account and scrubbed the vile surgeon from its website—though nobody knows if he has been disciplined or fired or merely hidden from public scrutiny. Hospital administrators probably know that they have messed up. But would they have done anything had it not been for the activism on the right?
The reality is that conservative Americans are tired of being called “dangerous” and “hateful” while liberals not only defend violence against us and our public figures as “karma” or “justified,” but also make videos with dancing and celebration.
There is no doubt that there is harshness, name-calling, and insensitivity on the right. But there is really no comparison to the behavior on the left. Conservatives don’t burn down cities when they are upset. And they don’t celebrate the murders of their political enemies. Because they don’t, they are in no mood to sit back and take it when they are lectured that the vicious murder of someone who thinks like they do is righteous, just, and an occasion for happiness. Especially not when the implication is made—or outright stated—that a bullet in the neck for more people like them is in order.
Can Americans again hear what Lincoln called “the mystic chords of memory” that can bring forth again the nation’s chorus and summon “the better angels of our nature”? For that to happen, liberals will need to silence the very loud death wishes that many in their ranks have been offering to those on the conservative side of the aisle.
David P. Deavel teaches at the University of St. Thomas in Houston. A past Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute, he is a Senior Contributor at The Imaginative Conservative. Follow him on X (Twitter) @davidpdeavel.
Read the full article here