AARON PATRICK: Charlie Kirk’s murder and the death of civility
The assassination of conservative leader Charlie Kirk unleashed a torrent of gleeful celebration that was cruel, childish and chilling.
The killing brought out an emotionally driven hostility towards conservative social values — a common response Mr Kirk tried to combat as a political activist through relentless face-to-face conversations with detractors.
Among those who refused to condemn the murder of a man trying to reason with university students over serious matters of policy, politics and philosophy was a leading light of Australian youth progressivism, Hannah Ferguson, who told her 200,000 Instagram followers that violence was sometimes necessary to achieve political objectives.
Sign up to The Nightly's newsletters.
Get the first look at the digital newspaper, curated daily stories and breaking headlines delivered to your inbox.
By continuing you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy.“I don’t wish to extend my empathy to Charlie Kirk,” she wrote.
“I seek to redirect it to those on the margins that he was all too willing to discriminate against and encourage the destruction of.”
Joanna Howe, a Rhodes Scholar and Adelaide University legal professor, called out the moral equivocation. “It’s not complicated or nuanced,” she wrote on X.
“It’s not even a question. The murder of Charlie Kirk during a public debate should be UNIVERSALLY condemned.”
Unfortunate celebrations
Others were more explicitly cruel. “F... that guy,” TikTok star Anthony Hyland told his 1.5 million followers. “God’s timing is always right.”
A woman who identifies herself as Madison Emily laughed and smiled as she welcomed the father-of-two’s death. “Bye Charlie Kirk,” she said on Instagram. “Like you said, people getting shot and killed because of the Second Amendment is so worth it. I never thought we would agree on anything!”
Mr Kirk’s unwavering defence of the constitutional protection of firearms ownership was a focus of much of the celebratory response.
“Congratulations to Charlie Kirk for becoming the new poster child for gun awareness and violence,” said an Instagram commentator who calls herself Angela’s Right.
Intellectual honesty
Like most American conservatives, he argued guns were essential to democracy. He had the intellectual honesty though, to acknowledge that freedom came at the cost of innocent lives. He did not celebrate this death, but understood it had become endemic to American life.
As the leading advocate for President Donald Trump on the 850 university campuses home to chapters of his group, Turning Point USA, Mr Kirk became a resented figure in worlds that would otherwise have little direct opposition from the right.
As every politician knows, the cost of a principled or intellectually consistent position is that it will inevitably be used against you. The 31-year-old’s refusal to dodge such uncomfortable truths contributed to his influence among young voters, who appreciated his refusal to bullshit them.
Unlike the Trump family members he socialised with, and the politicians he helped elect, Mr Kirk did not have access to government protection. His public appearances were often met with spiteful protests that descended into chaos and violence. Online threats were common. Turning Point USA said they reached into the thousands.
Taking the joke
Mr Kirk faced up to his detractors when he could have taken refuge behind a microphone and exercised as much influence. Was it bravery? Stubbornness? Arrogance? The reason doesn’t matter, and it killed him, but it was a display of resilience and perseverance shared by few of his opponents. The banner hanging over him as he bled to death, “Prove me wrong”, was a testament to this commitment.
Perhaps the clearest message that celebration, or even humour, was not the appropriate response to the killing came from a TV show, South Park, a comedy institution that revels in bad taste jokes.
South Park’s owners pulled an episode first broadcast last month that ridiculed Mr Kirk for his opposition to abortion and other conservative views. Before it was first screened, Mr Kirk’s supporters expressed concern that the show would contribute to a climate of hostility building up around him.
The activist did not complain. “We as conservatives need to be able to take a joke,” he said.
If Mr Kirk could give his opponents a pass to mock him in life, perhaps they should respect him in death?
