Don’t ask vulnerable people to feel outrage at the death of Charlie Kirk
The political commentator spent his life humiliating people who are said to upset him now, he writes. John David Card.
Over the last few days, online discourse was ruled by all kinds of death announcements and tribute to the late conservative American political commentator and provocateur Charlie Kirk after his deadly. pull At an event in Utah. Political violence may be in pain, but something that mourns Kirk should not be in the vulnerable people with whom he founded a career from the devil.
A piece of view on the subject can begin with the usual condemnation of all politically motivated violence and typically call for unity accompanying the scope of such events, but the truth is; Charlie Kirk devoted all adult life to the champion reasons that directly attacked those who have already been the most marginalized and humiliated in society. No note of the political left celebrates the murder of the murder, even in the summary of his early death. But many of us have enough reason to feel indifferent about his transition, and alienated from the public celebration of his life and values.
During the hours after the approval of the shooting of the shooting itself and Kirk, other high -profile commentators, and even elected officials in the United States and other places, turned the event into a collection cry against the left wings they perceived as enemies. US President Donald Trump itself among those who make early politics straw Except the incident.
In the meantime, the response of almost every chosen figure on the other side of the corridor, America and the world sympathized with Kirk’s loved ones and direct condemnation of the event. Best US Democrats Chuck Schumer And HAKEEM JEFFRES quickly condemned Pull. Like he did former presidents Barack Obama And Joe BidenUnited Kingdom Keir StarmerFrance Emmanuel Macronand ours Anthony ArbaneseAmong others. Liberal politicians and commentators around the world followed the high path here by choosing to describe Kirk as a passionate and religious man who defended that he believed.
A more honest inventory of Charlie Kirk’s life and beliefs adopting, as well as other things, allegedly African-Americans “It was better under slavery”called passage that 1964 Civil Rights Law “An error”contaminated victim Police murders as “siscigs” existence Muslims in Europe “A profession”and defended lifting Transsexual people from public life. Kirk spent his entire career trying to force as much problems as possible while trying to protect the base of the Republican party, a civilization front, and overlapped for people who took it further.
He was not just a political interpreter, but actively tried to radicalize people-young people-the right-wing ideology. He was an active virus bond that actively tries to actively shape the political landscape to color people, transsexual people, immigrants, and the rest of the reactionary right to the usual demographic characteristics in which it is increasingly accusing their shortcomings. And frankly, good people do not want to normalize the idea that Charlie Kirk is just a respectable commentator we have a simple difference.
At best, the insistence of political sympathy for the deceased Kirk recklessly evaluates his life -long studies by sowing the political division and encouraging a toxic, concern of his own, conservative ideology. And the worst of all, the reactionary right now surprises the fact that it uses this death agenda to do their best. However, now, if it should be noted that Kirk’s political views are so harmful, it will be accused of making implicitly. apology for the action of killing him.
During the writing, we don’t know who hit the man or what the reasons could be. He could have been a discontent left wingman who had adopted from Kirk and hated the views that wanted to silence him. The shot can be reasonable as a pleasant woman or former supporter of Kirk. Or, he is completely divorced from any political self -definition, acting from a serious deficiency of mental stability. We don’t know who’s doing it, but everyone on the left is expected to feel a common guilt for the action and reject it in a shame as if we have any personal responsibility. Unless the relevant shooter (s) is caught, we will not know their motives. Nevertheless, many on the right decided to put the crime on the feet of some leftist Boogeyman or the left for the death of Kirk.
Rather, after Kirk’s death, the man’s own expressions Solve the concept of empathy and regular writing events Only the inevitable cost of living in the United States was forgotten by its supporters. A cold but plain assessment of Kirk’s position on arms violence would suggest that he believed that the shots that took his life were only part of modern American society. It never happened “Left”In fact, the Democratic Party, where he only faces, is the case, but this is where the crime was ruled.
In addition, Republicans are currently controlling all three branches of the US government. The Presidency, the House of Representatives, the US Senate – and the US Supreme Court have the open majority and the majority of the state governorships. American conservatives have all the political power that may want, but the narrative that many interpreters and experts are forced to be under the attack by the liberals and leftists who express any criticism. Currently, the current manager of the FBI, which flows to capture Kirk’s shooting (s) Kash Patel.
No liberal deputy did not allow him to be with an independent left -wing activist, he had no hand in shaping the conditions that led to the murder of Kirk. A marginalized daily person who is identified with the left or supports democrats should certainly not feel any crime or should not be expected to have any guilt.
Considering how much the real damages and supporters of these views have been thirsty for the blood that Kirk’s life has been thirsty, it would be easy to make these views happy, especially when Kirk’s rhetoric rhetoric was most attacked. However, in the experience of this progressive writer, the majority of left-wings choose to take a higher way here-instead of choosing a simple acceptance of what is, to choose to repeat our principled condemnation of violence in general.
It is said that many of us have a good reason to find Galling, we don’t do enough. Charlie Kirk doesn’t cry enough for. To be “very separatist”. When we draw attention to how the intentions and actions of the world’s Charlie Kirks harm us, we are politicizing the tragedy. Progressive political organizers, domestic land rights campaigns, LGBTQ+ Activists, criminal justice reformers, we all left politically wider – we are very empathic to those who struggle with our character and challenges. But please do not want us to perform and engrave the idea of expressing care to the victims of the same violence that aims, does this and ends his own life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cealloTGOU
John David Card is a writer, historian and anarchist activist.
