A year ago today, Charlie Kirk lost his life to an assassin's bullet. Here is a portion of what I wrote in response to the news of his death:
Charlie Kirk did not deserve the manner of his final fate while speaking on a university campus in Utah. A young man struck down a month shy of his 32nd birthday leaving behind a widow and two small children.
Even if one believed his views to be repugnant, the First Amendment permits such speech. A free people can choose to accept, reject or ignore it.
What happened to Charlie Kirk today is every bit as wrong as what happened to Minnesota Democratic State Senator Melissa Hortman last June. No one should lose their life for expressing their point of view, right or wrong.
While we can and must condemn the act which ended the life of Charlie Kirk, we must not whitewash his legacy. As previously mentioned, I did not write a great deal about him but when I did write about him it was not to lavish him with praise. However appalling the circumstances of Charlie Kirk's death, it doesn't change the fact that he judged African Americans by their color of their skin instead of the content of their character. I will lament his death, but I won't ignore his bigotry and hatred of others. R.I.P.
With this in mind, let me draw your attention to an editorial in the Boston Globe written by Kara Bettis Carvalho which focuses on college students who are involved with Kirk's organization, Turning Point USA:
Yale’s chapter is one of dozens across the country that have launched since Kirk’s death. Turning Point’s website claims to currently sponsor 1,500 college chapters, including at 69 campuses around New England. A CNN report found that the organization had grown by 64 percent over the past year.
Students I spoke to say they want to promote dialogue — especially about economics and foreign policy — expose students on liberal campuses to opposing viewpoints, and at the very least, not be condemned for having a different political opinion that puts them in the small but not insignificant minority.
In many cases, conservative student groups meet to discuss politics, the news, and — what nearly every student told me — to have a “safe space” to talk honestly about their beliefs. Most of them had good relationships with the Democratic clubs on campus but had experienced harassment from far-left groups and individuals, including having their posters covered up.
On the surface, there is nothing wrong with wanting to promote dialogue and I am glad to hear that these students involved with Turning Point USA have cordial relationships with Democrats on campus.
It reminds me of my days as an undergraduate at Carleton University more than 30 years ago. At the time, I was involved in the campus NDP. Every year, there would be a Model Parliament. The first year, I attended it was organized by the campus Tories, and it was not a good event for those involved with other political parties.
Not wanting a repeat experience, I took it upon myself to work with the other campus political parties to organize an all-party committee to organize the next Model Parliament. With a focus on cooperation, the event was much more successful.
Of course, we disagreed. That is the essence of political parties and democracy at large. We just disagreed in an orderly manner. If Turning Point USA can co-exist with left-wing organizations on campus, then this is a good thing.
Nevertheless, I cannot help but wonder what these Turning Point USA campus groups discuss. After all, Kirk built his brand on conspiracy theories - COVID and election denialism with overt hostility towards African Americans and the LGBTQ community. If this is the sort of thing Turning Point USA talks about then I can see why it would turn off a great many people who would not be inclined to associate with it.
Let us also consider that in the year since Kirk's death, there have been several conspiracy theories hatched concerning his demise namely that his assassination was carried out by Israel and that his widow Erika was involved in his murder. In the grand scheme of things, we should not be surprised that someone who promoted conspiracy theories in life would be the subject of them in death.
While I have no doubt that there are those who joined Turning Point USA in good faith wishing to promote dialogue, I suspect that Charlie Kirk's legacy rests on an endless cycle of conspiracy theories and diatribes.
No comments:
Post a Comment