Yesterday afternoon was stunning for anyone who respected Charlie Kirk’s conservative activism and intellect. Having this happen on the eve of 9/11 is piling on.
Conservativism on campus was moribund until he took up his mission to restore it, with strong chapters of his group Turning Point USA at over 850 colleges in the United States. His interviews, debates and podcasts all showed his quick, grounded take on conservative values and why they have more legs than most liberal causes of the week. He also raised enmity by outclassed progressives, which may have led to one or more of them deciding if you can’t beat him, kill him.
Since I’m a physician, let’s begin with medical facts. Anyone shot or knifed in the neck has a high risk of either paralysis from spinal cord damage or bleeding quickly to death from the major blood supplies to the head, mainly the carotid arteries. So the close occurrence of Irina Zarutska’s stabbing death in Charlotte (“I got that white girl”) and Kirk’s shooting death in Utah (“I got that fascist”?) are godawful demonstrations of that. Not coincidentally, both assailants were clearly refugees, though different from Irina’s sort. Her killer, from the legal boundaries we rely on in public and Kirk’s, from the inability to tolerate disagreement peacefully. And both from normal moral reality.
It hurts to think that we have lost such an energetic, successful young leader so soon, at just 31 years old. I felt more angry, sad and depressed at the news than I would have expected. It hurts to think of his wife and two children. It hurts to think of Irina and every victim and family. Pray for them! Yet this fate occurs to thousands of Americans every year, for even less reason, if we are able to think there are reasons.
How could anyone consider a pharma CEO, an articulate conservative and politicians on both sides (Giffords, Congressional baseballers, Minnesota legislators) fair game to murder, let alone naïve young bus riders or school children? These are not the usual homicides over jealousy, money or power. These are punishment for who they are and to eliminate people who disagree. That’s all. Assailants may recognize they can’t match their targets on equal terms. Because the threat of losing the argument feels unbearably wounding, it may get characterized as “endangering democracy” or claimed that innocent people are grievously harmed by someone’s position or even existence. Remember “Words are violence”?
I’m getting old. I remember the 1960’s when, in fairly rapid succession, we lost John, Bobby, Martin and Malcolm to such pitch black, inconceivable intolerance. The Manson murders, Lennon’s death, Ford’s and Reagan’s assassination attempts were for more garden variety reasons, even if cloaked in some social illusion. The Weathermen, SLA, Italy’s Red Brigades and Germany’s Baader-Meinhoff all delusionally believed their violence would improve society. Then somehow this deranged violence eased. Only Ted Kaczynski kept at it, secretively. (If you’re younger than me, and most are, you may need to look up some of these. And you should.)
Mass shootings ticked up since the infamous Aurora school massacre in 1999, many inspired by those and subsequent killers. A belief in their own victimization has motivated many with sexual or gender issues as well as political or racial hatreds to take vengeance on others. Two nearly successful attempts on President Trump’s life should be unthinkable.
Are we in another era of violent confrontations between irreconcilable, antagonistic fanatics? May be. One researcher says there have been 150 incidents of politically motivated violence just through June this year–nearly twice as many as the first 6 months of last year. It’s been rising steadily since the January 6 Capitol riot.
As our nation has grown more secular (not entirely a bad thing) the foundational “moral and religious People” John Adams knew were necessary for lasting democracy seem to be becoming less so. This to me appears to be the growing fracture in our commonweal. Charlie Kirk is the latest casualty, along with respect, tolerance and virtue.
Pragmatically, in order to survive individually, the whole nonsense about “root causes” of violence (even my own) need to be shelved in favor of actually protecting people. Any large (or smaller, contentious) gatherings must have capable advance site assessment and armed, trained personnel covering the attendees better than in Butler, Pennsylvania or Utah Valley U. Not to mention all schools and places of worship. And every willing and able citizen should go armed in order so as to act decisively when danger arises.
Societally, there actually is an answer, one we all ought to adopt. Simply, it is to work at hearing each other. Not to achieve agreement or expect any resolution. .Just to listen and try to understand those who are not in our camp without labeling them outcasts.
My last living best friend since college has always been more liberal than me, even when I called myself one. About a month after President Trump’s 2024 victory, we talked, as we do every few months. “B.” was outraged and couldn’t stop listing the many ways that Trump would be a dangerous dictatorial demagogue. The word “fascist” was invoked. I could get no word in edgewise, so just listened until he tired out.
When we signed off, I asked that since we spent that conversation focused on his fears and anger, next time please let me describe how the majority of voters might be seeing the same things very differently. Not to agree, just to hear the other perspective. He did, and I was grateful. Our conversations are now back to normal, and when we talk politics it’s a much easier back and forth.
Charlie Kirk leaves behind accomplishments that any man would be proud of in a much longer lifetime. I hope he is also remembered because he knew what he was talking about and why.
This statement is prominently displayed on his website’s home page. It should be at the very top:
“We heal our divides by talking to people we disagree with . . .
You heal the country when you allow disagreement.”
No one has said it better.
.
— DRGO Director & Editor Robert B. Young, MD is a psychiatrist practicing in Pittsford, NY, an associate clinical professor at the University of Rochester School of Medicine, and a Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.