this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
1021 points (97.8% liked)
Charlie Kirk Memorial
160 readers
117 users here now
Let's remember Charlie Kirk for who he was.
"I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that does a lot of damage." -Charlie Kirk
founded 4 days ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think it's admirable to live your life that way and probably the most effective at actually changing minds. But I think you need to extend that empathy to the people who are happy he's dead as well. I would never sit here and lecture a person whose kid died in a school shooting that we need to feel bad Kirk is gone.
The main problem with that philosophy is locking yourself into a binary. I'm sure you can admit that Hitler's death was pretty much all upside right?
The Hitler comparison actually proves my point - Hitler was a dictator who invaded countries and orchestrated genocide. Kirk was a campus activist who held debates. Who despite having ideas we opposed, still engaged in dialogue. If we can't distinguish between those two things, if every political opponent becomes 'literally Hitler,' then we've lost the ability to have proportional responses to actual threats.
My concern isn't about protecting Kirk's memory - it's about what celebrating political murder does to democratic discourse and how it hands ammunition to people who want to justify their own extremism. When the left cheers assassination, it makes every accusation about us being violent radicals seem credible.
I agree that a comparison of Kirk to Hitler is not apt but it highlights my problem with your philosophy. There absolutely are some instances of political violence that should be celebrated (Hitler's death). I think to ask questions is the right approach, or at least more right than loudly uncritically declaring your joy but in my mind the world will be a better place without Kirk in it.
As far as the violent left claims are concerned, we've already lost that battle. They believed those things without evidence previously and they'll continue to whether we give them ammunition or not. Kirk never came to argue in good faith, he was a propaganda/hate mouthpiece. Look at how he responded when backed into a corner, he would never change his mind and that's why I take umbrage with the characterization that he engaged in dialogue. He was a monologist who used his words as weapons.
At the end of the day though I think you're right. The world can always use more empathy and empathetic people and we should strive for that but we're also imperfect and missteps should be met with that same energy.