Discourse following the Charlie Kirk assassination has left little to be hopeful about, writes Nolan Higdon.
Charlie Kirk speaking with attendees at the 2025 Student Action Summit at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida, in July 2025. (Gage Skidmore/ Flickr/ CC BY-SA 4.0)
By Nolan Higdon
Substack
On Wednesday, the shocking news reverberated across the United States: Charlie Kirk, right-wing influencer and Trump ally, had been shot dead while holding an event at a Utah university campus.
The killing was live-streamed to the world, and, in an indication of where our narcissistic, profit-driven culture has taken us, some online personalities immediately sought to exploit the footage to drive traffic and grow their audiences.
Kirk’s death exposed and amplified America’s deep political and cultural divisions, revealing how too many media outlets and political actors exploit tragedy to reinforce partisan narratives rather than fostering unity or meaningful dialogue.
Hyper-Polarized Frames
Much of the media portrayed Kirk’s death as a watershed moment in political violence.
NPR wrote, “The killing of Charlie Kirk adds to a time of political upheaval and violence,” while the BBC noted, “Charlie Kirk killing lays bare America’s bloody and broken politics.”
The Washington Post claimed, “America enters a new age of political violence.” Ezra Klein took a break from rebranding neoliberalism into Abundance to pen an op-ed in The New York Times titled, “Charlie Kirk Was Practicing Politics the Right Way,” which lauded Kirk for engaging with people he disagreed with.
These accounts sought to make the case that Americans, across the ideological spectrum, are abandoning democratic display and processes for violence and unfettered access to power.
Rather than discuss how to change the trajectory of the nation from such divisive violence, the partisan figures in news media and politics stoked the flames.
Conservatives cited attacks such as the 2017 shooting at Congressional baseball practice, the May 2025 shooting at an Israeli Embassy in the U.S., and the two assassination attempts on Donald Trump in 2024 as evidence that the left is perpetuating political violence.
Meanwhile, leftists pointed out that Democrats were murdered in Minnesota in June, targeted during the Jan. 6 Capitol attack in 2021, that fire was set at Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s mansion in 2025, and Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, was beaten with a hammer in 2022 — underscoring that threats are bipartisan.
They also pointed to The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) studies which concluded that conservatives engaged in political violence far more than leftists. Trump spoke to this on Fox News Channel where he argued that “The radicals on the right oftentimes are radical because they don’t want to see crime. The radicals on the left are the problem.”
Regardless, conservatives framed the Kirk murder as an act of war from the left.
Indeed, numerous conservatives blamed the left including activists such as Kristan Hawkins, founder of anti-abortion group Students for Life of America, who said, “This is a new civil war.”
Brian Eastwood, a conservative influencer posted, “You want a fight and you’re going to get it… They’ve declared war.” Media personalities such as Fox News host Jesse Watters said, “Whether we want to accept it or not, they are at war with us. And what are we going to do about it? How much political violence are we going to tolerate?”
Although some Republican politicians such as Utah Governor Spencer Cox spoke in apolitical terms about the violence, high profile conservatives put fuel on the fire.
For example, “The left and their policies are leading America into a civil war. And they want it… The gloves are off,” proclaimed Wisconsin Republican Rep. Derrick Van in a social media post. He was joined by President Trump, who, with a long history of divisive political rhetoric, broke with tradition by singling out the “radical left” for the nation’s political violence rather than calling for unity.
In a subsequent appearance announcing the capture of the suspect in Kirk’s murder, Tyler Robinson, Trump indicated that revenge on the left would have to come outside of democratic processes “He [Kirk] would want revenge at the voter, ballot box, but unfortunately we do not have so many ballot boxes because they have mail in voting which is totally rigged.”
Left-leaning frames were mixed.
Some such as progressive influencer Hasan Piker called the murder “devastating.” Others celebrated Kirk’s death—prompting right-wing social media users to identify and target these users.
Some leftists tried to change the focus to a discussion about the role of guns in political violence by noting that Kirk once said, “I think it’s worth having a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.”
Many leftists condemned the media for covering Kirk’s death extensively, arguing that attention distracted from other tragedies, such as a school shooting in Colorado on the same day.
Colliding Frames
Charlie Kirk debating with a college student in April 2024. (Shoot for the Stars/ Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 4.0)
The legacy media’s framing of Kirk as a symbol and champion of free speech principles collided with countervailing frames from leftist critics.
By the age of 31, Kirk had built an empire at Turning Point USA, producing viral videos debating college students and promoting the idea that higher education was unnecessary, as a proud college dropout.
He brought his arguments to college campuses and the videos portrayed him as engaging with anyone willing to attempt to “prove me wrong.” As a result, the news outlets framed the murder as an assault on free speech.
It is true that Kirk sparred with figures like California Governor Gavin Newsom and was even slated to debate Piker, whom he debated previously, according to Breaking Points. But critics argued that this framing conceals the full story.
Kirk built his brand on selectively edited videos that made him appear sharp while making students look foolish, reinforcing his anti-college narrative. In fact, when he recorded a video of himself watching a South Park episode that accused him of selective editing, an episode that has since been removed from television out of respect to Kirk, Kirk edited out the clip of the show making the accusation when he filmed his reaction.
Furthermore, Kirk also engaged in tactics that suppressed debate and dialogue.
He created a McCarthyite-style list of professors he targeted for spreading “leftist propaganda” and encouraged students to record — often illegally — these professors, chilling academic discourse.
While he is rumored to have avoided debates with some professors, he participated in many and was famously humiliated by professors and students during a Cambridge University debate in May 2025.
In addition to the “free-speech champion” frame of Kirk, conservative and legacy media’s celebration of Kirk’s life ran up against left wing frames of Kirk.
News coverage quickly spiraled into what could be called “grief porn” — the public indulgence in tragedy through tenuous associations, a voyeuristic fixation on others’ misfortune.
Commentators and politicians scrambled to signal the weight of the loss: Governor Cox quoted Kirk when announcing the suspect was captured; F.B.I. Director Kash Patel (who incorrectly announced the suspect was caught over 30 hours before they were caught) asked Kirk to rest peacefully; the Trump administration ordered flags at half-mast and awarded Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom; his body was flown to his Arizona home on Air Force Two; and Yankee Stadium observed a moment of silence. Online, tributes poured in by the thousands.
Leftist critics portrayed Kirk as a hate-spewing pariah.
They cited Kirk’s sexist, racist, and xenophobic statements such as urging women “submit to their husbands” for happiness; telling listeners to “reject feminism;” promoting the racist “great replacement” myth; implying that people of color become pilots due to their race not their skills; disparaging Muslims noting “large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America;” promoting anti-Semitic tropes such as “Jews control … the colleges, the nonprofits, the movies, Hollywood, all of it;” blaming transgender people for a supposed decline in masculinity, arguing that they should be taken care of “the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s,” and denying the separation of church and state.
A Crackdown on Free Speech
American discourse in the post-Charlie Kirk assassination has left little to be hopeful about. Despite attempts to use Kirk’s death as a call for why we need to protect free speech, including speech we disagree with, we are seeing a crackdown on speech.
Ironically, this crackdown comes mostly from the defenders of Kirk, a self-described free speech absolutist.
Indeed, around the globe, since Kirk’s death, employees in fields from education to professional sports have been disciplined for comments justifying or celebrating Kirk’s death. Indeed, many have lost employment.
MSNBC fired senior political analyst Matthew Dowd for asking whether hateful rhetoric contributes to violence, and reporter A.G. Gancarski was suspended for asking Rep. Randy Fine if Kirk’s shooting made him reconsider support for campus conceal-carry policies.
Guilford Technical Community College dismissed Lisa Greenlee for comments celebrating Kirk’s death. A teacher in Massachusetts, a Texas professor, and an NFL staffer faced similar punishment over similar accusations.
There have been so many such actions that Time cataloged them in an article titled, “From Firings to the Threat of Deportation: Commenters Deemed Offensive After Charlie Kirk’s Death Face Consequences.”
These actions coupled with the removal of the South Park episode is the exact opposite of the free speech principles that Kirk supporters purport to stand for. Indeed, memorializing Kirk by clamping down on free speech is tantamount to celebrating Martin Luther King Jr. by segregating mourners.
There are other areas of dismay from the post-Kirk discourse. Many have responded to the heightened fear by spreading more fear.
Numerous politicians, activists, and media personalities have cancelled public events in response. Far be it for me to tell these people what to do, but the collective result of being afraid to use our rights is that they are easier to take away.
Location where Charlie Kirk was shot at Utah Valley University, screenshot taken from video from helicopter on Sept. 10, 2025. (KSL News Utah/ Youtube/ Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY 3.0)
As more people are afraid to speak at or attend events, especially around divisive and controversial matters, the less freedom and rights we can hope to secure moving forward. To make matters worse there have been numerous false threats made at schools, including the U.S. Naval Academy fueling fear across the nation.
Despite all the rhetoric about unity, too many people — including powerful figures like the president — are actively fueling division.
I have to ask: where do they think this cycle of division and hate will end? History shows us the answer — thousands, sometimes millions, die; human cruelty rises; systems collapse; and countless people suffer.
For nearly 50 years, Americans have grown far too comfortable with hyper-partisan narratives that blame “the other side” for every problem, rather than doing the difficult work of investigating claims and content with evidence, critical thinking, and civic and media literacy.
It is such an intellectually lazy and anti-democratic mindset that has brought us to this dangerous moment. How much further do we want to go before we change course?
Vilifying the opposition doesn’t work. Thinking you have all the answers doesn’t work. What does work is looking inward: How can we do better to live up to the ideals we claim to hold? How can we refuse to support those who profit from division and hate?
I’ll leave you with powerful words from yesterday’s 9/11 memorial event. One speaker said:
“On September 12th [2001], this nation was united in unspeakable tragedy. It didn’t matter what ethnic origin, religion, political affiliation or socioeconomic status you were, we were all united in grief and love. Our better angels prevailed, and may they prevail again.”
Nolan Higdon is a political analyst, author, host of The Disinfo Detox Podcast, lecturer at Merrill College and the Education Department at University of California, Santa Cruz, and Project Censored Judge. Higdon’s popular Substack includes the bi-weekly Gaslight Gazette. Higdon’s areas of concentration include critical AI literacy, podcasting, digital culture, news media history & propaganda, and critical media literacy. All of Higdon’s work is available at Substack (https://nolanhigdon.substack.com/). Higdon is a founding member of the Critical Media Literacy Conference of the Americas. He is a regular source of expertise for CBS, NBC, The New York Times, and The San Francisco Chronicle.
The views expressed in this article and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
“Nine. One. One. What’s your emergency?” Oh, you are not gonna buhlieve this; BUT, we “got” another, “unresolved murder” of one. Another, very public execution. This time on a college campus! The Divided $tates of Corporate America is absophknlutely f/sick!!!. ‘Make America Healthy Again?!?“ Bull-$h*t!!! “The only sound that’s left, after the ambulances go, is Cinderella sweeping up on Desolation Row.”
“One for sorrow. Two for joy. Three for boys. Four for girls. Five for silver. Six for gold. Seven for the secrets never to be told.” However, in the land of the “still” free press; &, the home of the brave “ring out the changes of how everything is”.
For example, 1) *“No one should be surprised when Israel executes another handful of journalists next week or the week after. But doubtless there will continue to be media “investigations”. Journalists will show they are on the case – even as hospitals keep getting attacked, journalists keep being assassinated, children keep dying of starvation, and an unremarked genocide unfolds to the bitterest of conclusions.” Jonathan Cook, 8.29.25
2) “Meet the Opposition.” 9.9.25, Trump’s-Vance’s, Inc., *Big Night Out w/“Little” Marco Rubio & Hegseth. It’s DJ “the Big$hot’s” Trump’s FIRST “private” dinner date in a very public D.C. restaurant. DJ “The Big $hot” Trump “Biggy Sizes” everything. Yapp’n about never feeling safer, in D.C. Ten minutes later, inside “Joe’s”, DJ’s “safety” was trumped by “his” radical left, women. 100% dumping on Trump-Vance, Inc., “Free D.C.! Free Palestine! Trump is the Hitler of our time!”
Imo, DJ “Octo-Bogey” Trump is golf’s biggest “Snowman”. Coming in hot! NOT, “All the snow has turned to water.” i.e., “Nine. One. One. What’s your emergency?” Meltdown @ Joe’s, 15th and H Streets. Yep, 1 block fm the WH.
Everybody, knows, how this ends. Yep, DJ “the Big $hot” Trump’s scowling, burnt-orange, mug, i.e., an American Eagle w/bad genes rock’n “cotton candy hair sprayed w/piss”, got hate & war, written all over it, “Get ‘em outta here!” No worries, Mr. President; &, out the front door, they went. Obviously, contempt, hate, war, complicity “live large” on both sides of the duopoly. No doubt, questions, abound, 2) How would you like “The Hypocrisy,” slow-boiled or pan-fried?
3) “Is it better to kill people outright or to starve them slowly? Which would look better? I ask you, which of us sitting in this hall would willingly submit to the indignity that Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank have been subjected to for decades? What peaceful means have the Palestinian people not tried? What compromise have they not accepted – other than the one that requires them to crawl on their knees and eat dirt?” Arundhati Roy’s PEN Pinter Prize 2024 Speech @ hxxps://pentransmissions.com/2024/10/15/no-propaganda-on-earth-can-hide-the-wound-that-is-palestine-arundhati-roys-pen-pinter-prize-2024-speech/
IMO, “we, the people,” remain anti-exploitation, anti-degradation, anti-oppression, anti-the duopoly. “Our better angels,” are sailing on the Mediterranean Sea. Destination: Gaza. *“The main thing for us” [the Global Sumud Flotilla w/more than 50 ships, set sail on 8.31.25], “is to eliminate the root causes of the crisis in Gaza: 1) Propaganda, 2) Blockades, starvation, dehydration, lack of medication, destruction, homelessness, death; 3) The perpetual rape of Palestine; 4) The elimination of BB’s IDF’s & BB’s B*tches’ of the West, Trump-Vance, Inc., foreign & domestic policy, “Use, Abuse, Abandon plant, animal, human life,” in a heartbeat.
When people understand, “THE SIEGE MUST FALL. Gaza must live. Palestine must be free,” The Global Sumud Flotilla 8.29.25. When people understand “Israel is not fighting a war of self-defence. It is fighting a war of aggression. A war to occupy more territory, to strengthen its Apartheid apparatus and tighten its control on Palestinian people and the region;” Arundhati Roy. “When people understand, it’s everybody’s business to force Israel & the USG to GTFO of Gaza,” When people understand, “1963” “Nine Eleven”, “J-6”, “Genocide” “Ethnic Cleansing” “9.10.25,” is, imo, by design; then people will understand the road to peace on earth is the full removal of Israel & the USG from Gaza & the West Bank of Jordan.
Onward & Upwards. TY, Nolan Higdon CN, et al.
Sources:
* “Desolation Row”, Bob Dylan
* hxxs://dc.eater.com/dining-out-in-dc/163467/trump-dines-out-dc-joes-seafood-downtown
* “Souvenirs,” John Prine
* hxxps://consortiumnews.com/2025/08/29/jonathan-cook-the-medias-israeli-atrocity-treadmill/
* “Days Like This”, Van Morrison
* President Vladimir Putin
* hxxps://consortiumnews.com/2025/08/29/global-sumud-flotilla-over-50-ships-to-set-sail-for-gaza/
Thank you Nolan, you write: “…rather than doing the difficult work of investigating claims and content with evidence, critical thinking…”
Significant work from GrayZone—>> investigating claims and content with evidence:
“…Kirk was summoned to the Hamptons for a face-to-face with one of Netanyahu’s most influential allies in the US. billionaire power broker Bill Ackman…”
“…A month before Charlie Kirk’s killing, billionaire pro-Israel moneyman Bill Ackman arranged an intervention in the Hamptons during which sources say he and others “hammered” Kirk for the conservative leader’s growing criticism of Israeli influence in Washington. Kirk came away fretting about Israeli “blackmail,” sources say, as he contemplated a Catholic conversion…”
“…On September 11, one day after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, billionaire pro-Israel moneyman Bill Ackman [60 yrs. old ] took to Twitter/X to trumpet his relationship with the late conservative operative…”:
“I feel incredibly privileged to have spent a day and shared a meal with @charliekirk11 this summer. He was a giant of a man.”
hxxps://thegrayzone.com/2025/09/15/bill-ackman-israel-intervention-charlie-kirk/
Ackman’s Intervention guest list includes a cast of avaricious young influencers under Israel’s sway:
+Seth Dillon – Dillion is the CEO of Babylon Bee; Dillon and his crew have derisively mocked famine-stricken Palestinians and their supporters in the West
+Xaviaer DuRousseau – DuRousseau is employed by Prager U, the premier right-wing “edu-tainment” hub targeting the minds of American youth. His boss, Marissa Streit, is a veteran of the Israeli army’s Unit 8200 cyber-spying division.
+Emily Wilson aka Emily Saves America – Wilson is a Los Angeles-based self-described libertarian podcaster and social media influencer with over 500,000 followers on Instagram.
+Arynne Wexler – A former Goldman Sachs trader seeking cachet in the world of online influencers, Wexler is a vociferously Zionist,
+Nate Friedman – Friedman is a young ultra-Zionist influencer best known for New York City man-on-the-street confrontations with Palestine solidarity activists, whom he’s accused of being paid protesters.
+Ory Rinat – Rinat was the former Special Media Advisor to Jared Kushner, the Trump son-in-law and advisor, before moving on to serve as White House chief digital officer during Trump’s first term.
+CJ Pearson – The chair of the Republican National Committee’s Youth Advisory Council, Pearson appeared in photos in the Hamptons alongside Wilson and DeRousseau.
In regard to the death of Mr. Kirk, naturally US President Trump would be ‘fueling the divisions’ which arise from such a useful political event. Like most politicians, you never let a good story go without milking it, lies and all.
From the participation and interest in this article, it seems in death, Mr. Kirk has become a figure of of great importance to many.
Basically, from his political views, one could say Mr. Kirk was just another reactionary thinker, with narrow tunnel vision when it came to thinking about everybody else’s basic rights in this world.
.
No doubt there are plenty more people left in our world who are also reactionary, hypocritical religious people. Sadly, they will take Mr. Kirk’s place in keeping those on the bottom ladder of our repressive western class system in their place.
So, perhaps we had better get on with the struggle. We have still to succeed with Gaza!
.
Seems many readers are having issues with the last paragraph, pointing out what came later, etc.
But the author’s point, surely was that right after the tragedy, we found a way to be united in grief, shock, patriotism, and pride in the reactions and bravery of the first responders.
That the tragedy of that day way used by the cabal in charge to foment a long planned war does not take away from our united response … or the divisiveness that followed. The powers that be had their “new Pearl Harbor” and knew what they wanted to do with it.
It Does show the dangers of being united: much easier to lead a herd to ruin and slaughter than disparate rebellious and cantankerous citizens.
What a horrible quote to end an otherwise respectable article.
“better angels”? I’ll exercise my right to freedom from religion and avoid the only topic more contentious than political debate.
“prevailed”? As in the jump-starting of today’s security/surveillance/police state, islamophobia and extrajudicial assassinations?
Phew!
I wonder if the author ever debated Charlie Kirk on his views?
Now, I watched Kirk on a few occasions; agreed on some topics, disagreed on others. As such, I barely watched him since I didn;t find him appealing.
However, I never saw Kirk pick up a gun and start shooting at his debaters.
The man had a microphone, his debaters had a microphone. Period.
Any suggestions that he had it coming or that he participated at the splitting of the society is stupid since, again, he could have been debated and debunked on many topics.
But as long as one picks up a gun instead of a microphone, well… you get division.
This guy was a complete bigot. He made a living promoting hate. tRump ordering flags at half staff is a disgusting display of his utter ignorance and bigotry.
There was only 1 real attempt on tRumps pitiful life. The guy at the golf course DID NOT fire a shot. You can’t say he did anything except be where he Might have done something. They are trying to throw the book at him for being where he didn’t belong? The injustice system is hard at work. The felon is in power? Kirk is gone. tRump being gone, along with the entire right-wing crowd would be my highest wish. By gone I mean far from any power. I also wish people would stop with the left vs. right terminology. There is no one in power from the real left. The narrative is ridiculous.
It’s a little off-putting — because they’ve done such fine work in the past — the way otherwise excellent commentators and journalists are immediately promoting the conspiracy angle that Kirk may have been murdered by Mossad operatives or pro-Israel functionaries. People like Max Blumenthal, Greenwald, Parampil and a few other notables.
I’m as big a critic of Israeli control over Washington as anyone but it does not appear to be the case that Zionists were responsible for killing this guy who spent the vast, vast majority of his career as a fervid Israel supporter. To try and stretch things and say Israeli backers committed this particular homicide is to otherwise discredit the sound and credible work of genuine anti-Zionist criticism and scholarship.
It’s looking like Kirk was likely murdered by one of these ID politics obsessed deranged crackpots. Occam’s Razor.
If Blumenthal and Greenwald agree on something, then IT IS PROBABLY RIGHT. We have a Zionist infestation in the US Congress backing genocide in Palestine. Absolute filth runs the US govt.
I don’t know if it’s Israel that “controls America” or that Israel is America’s psychotic prick jammed into Palestine, or BOTH.
In case you haven’t noticed, Israel has been conducting genocide in Palestine with direct US Aid. CENTCOM is a war criminal, and a US admiral, who backs genocide in Palestine. CENTCOM backs genocide because CENTCOM backs Israel.
The US govt is infested with war criminals. I am a veteran of whatever that Iraq thing was supposed to be, and I know that the US govt is run by war criminals, and the corporate media– from Fox to MSNBC — is nothing but propaganda.
Some of the best and brightest are incorrect on a few things from time to time. People have blind spots.
The Jewish supremacists have been carrying out the most grotesque genocide in my lifetime. They also browbeat the US into attacking Iraq. They didn’t need to murder Charlie Kirk to advance their interests in Washington.
As I stated, I’m as big a critic of Zio power in Washington as anyone and I fully acknowledge this kid who killed Kirk is not dissimilar to some of these other culture war obsessives.
There is no doubt that after 9/11 the American people were united perhaps the most since the Second World War. This is what the author is referring to. Unfortunately the elite used the opportunity 0f 9/11 (some people believe created it) to impose surveillance domestically and launch imperial wars abroad ending in defeat in both Afghanistan (decisively) and in Iraq. The unity experienced after 9/11 was clearly because a common external enemy was perceived, which unfortunately is not the case today after this Kirk killing. Instead, the opposing sides are uniting together it appears against each other.
AI response:
Following his 2021 acquittal, Kyle Rittenhouse appeared at several events for Charlie Kirk’s conservative organization, Turning Point USA. However, a public disagreement emerged in March 2024 when a student confronted Rittenhouse at a University of Memphis event about controversial comments made by Kirk. The recent assassination of Kirk in September 2025 has also added a new dimension to public discussions involving Rittenhouse.
The 2024 event at the University of Memphis
During a March 2024 speaking engagement, a student directly challenged Rittenhouse on stage about Kirk’s past remarks, particularly those accused of being racist.
Student’s allegations against Kirk: The student claimed Kirk had made racist statements, including saying that Juneteenth and Martin Luther King Jr. Day should not be celebrated, calling Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson an “affirmative action hire,” and making negative comments about George Floyd.
Rittenhouse’s response: When asked about these comments, Rittenhouse initially claimed ignorance. He then refused to comment on whether Kirk’s alleged statements constituted hate speech, prompting boos from the audience.
Context of the appearance: The event was part of a Turning Point USA campus tour. The confrontation sparked a backlash online and in the media, with some criticizing Rittenhouse for his association with Kirk and Turning Point USA.
The 2025 assassination of Charlie Kirk
In September 2025, Charlie Kirk was shot and killed at an event in Utah. This event has brought renewed public scrutiny to the political climate and rhetoric surrounding conservative figures like Kirk and Rittenhouse.
Assassination details: Kirk’s death took place on a university campus. The event was widely circulated on social media, with footage of the shooting spreading rapidly.
Rittenhouse in connection to the event: Recent reports discussing the aftermath of Kirk’s death have mentioned Rittenhouse’s previous association with him. This has resurfaced the discussion of the public disagreement that took place between Rittenhouse and Kirk regarding the student’s questions at the University of Memphis event.
Broader political context: The assassination has intensified political tensions and led to public discussion about political violence in the U.S..
Summary of the relationship timeline
Post-acquittal support (late 2021–2023): After his acquittal, Rittenhouse was embraced by conservative media, appearing on Kirk’s podcast and speaking at Turning Point USA events.
Public disagreement (March 2024): A public clash occurred when a student confronted Rittenhouse about Kirk’s alleged racist comments. Rittenhouse’s refusal to defend or condemn Kirk’s remarks highlighted a point of tension.
Kirk’s assassination (September 2025): The recent assassination of Kirk has brought new attention to the public disagreement and the broader context of political violence surrounding both figures.
Charlie Kirk was, until recently, an ardent supporter of Israel’s genocide operations.
To call his murder an “assassination” elevates Kirk to the status of war criminal.
To receive accolades from Mileikowski (Bibi) for Kirk, is like receiving eternal damnation from gawd.
He was a Christian Nationalist (very much an anti Constitutional position) and white supremest. This is only speech up until his death , but is it also violence against life a secular democratic country and racist terror?
I won’t morn Mr. Kirk ; he fomented violence, IMO.
We should mourn that Kirk fell into the cesspit of Zionism.
The 9/11 unity without bigotry is a rewrite of history. Islamophobia was rampant. Even in the notoriously progressive and hip town of Santa Cruz California I recall a caller screaming at a UCSC radio DJ for playing Arabic music on his World Music program a few days later. By the time Obama was elected, 9/11 had “changed everything” to the point that the hippies in the drum circle celebrating his win downtown were chanting “USA, USA!”
Thank you for setting the record straight on that. That event put Muslims in this country in great danger. Empires require both martyrs and scapegoats.
I think the last thing I’d quote is some boilerplate remarks at a 9/11 memorial. We were all united in our grief? No, we were not–the Bush Administration was already plotting up a mass murder amd endless war that rolls on to this day, all of it triggered by the same imperial fascism (just another word for Capitalist grasping in its death throes) that Kirk and his paymasters worked for. Fraud, deceit, cruelty, overarching ignorance, and wholesale, worldwide murder were ushered in on 9/11, and those modes rule today. The better angels of our nature prevailed immediately after 9/11? Say what? Really? The journalist Patrick Lawrence marks 9/11 as the day everything went out the window, and he’s right. It is manifestly NOT time to look inward, but rather outward, into a world we mostly feel no need to understand. That world includes this country.
I think that’s pretty much where I’m at on this thing. Didn’t know anything about Kirk. Maybe SPLC would have told me about him and the Groypers if I’d contributed recently. I should have known something about him, but in my look outward my media radar didn’t see him. Media should have told me something, and accordingly when he began to have doubts about the support he was getting from Israel they should have told me about that too.
It didn’t happen to be “my” media. hxxps://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/09/inflaming-tensions-trump-threatens-political-left-with-retribution-over-killing-of-charlie-kirk.html#comment-4281275
As Drew wrote, he was a “fervid Israel supporter.” But, if he had doubts, then he was becoming a threat. And, if he was then shot, the threat would be gone and it would make sense the liberals in America would take a hit. So, there’s that much you can say for Blumenthal’s conjecture, though I need to finish listening to what he’s saying on Sabrina Salvati’s podcast.
Has anybody written a book or researched the number of violent coups the US has participated in since post-WW2?
The proxy war with Russia came as a result of a violent coup by the CIA. We’re watching a genocide livestreamed to us 24/7 and being told it’s not a genocide. We’ve attacked Iran and claim to be prepping for a fight against China. Isn’t Israel fighting like 6 to 7 countries right now?
I would say that most people occupying the Earth right now have witnessed nonstop violence in our country and in other countries committed by the US.
Toss in Hollywood and video games, and we’ve been saturated with violence. The uniparty’s mission, along with the Legacy Media, is to keep us pointing at each other. Divide and conquer is the method by which the oligarchy protects itself from the masses. If the masses stopped fighting against each other and focused on who is really oppressing them, the plutocracy would be in trouble.
And, it’s even worse when we’ve got a total narcissistic imbecile in Washington who lacks empathy for others. Trump has no leadership ability or skills because he is too focused on himself.
Agree.
Yes. “We are the 99%” that came out of Occupy Wall Street had to be dismantled and erased from the public mind before it sunk in to the consciousness of too many.
I think I’ve seem this movie… hopefully Charlie is doing well in post-op after his plastic surgery. maybe they suicided him- who knows, its a ruthless game this divide-and-control..
I’m sorry that a young man was assassinated. I’m baffled, however, at the world wide coverage of Charlie Kirk’s death going on an on at the same time a genocide of the Palestinians including dozens of children used as target practice is happening. I just can’t grasp how this one person’s death deserves media coverage over the targeted deaths of little kids trying to get a bit of food and being shot while they are already at the point of starvation.
Where are the standards of news reporters? What are they thinking? Is it a contest for eyeballs, translating into money? Fear? What? Why haven’t they written how Kirk’s views were changing on Israel? I see Netanyahu and Trump both are skipping over that and praising him for his loyalty to the genocide.
Thanks to Higdon for teaching me far more than I knew about Kirk, good and objections. What I always fear is what happened to Lincoln: one madman with a gun undid the brutal victory over slavery of a four-year civil war.
As for Justice and Due Process found within American constitutions and statutes, forget it now. How can someone be given American justice when the President and the governor of the state have both promised to apply the death penalty before trial? Where can the trial take place now? We have lost that for which we stand.
I never even heard of Charlie Kirk before his murder, and I’d venture to say that in the celebrity culture that defines our day, thousands who now express outrage across the spectrum never had either. Be that as it may, one must be honest how easily we grab hold of the outrage propoganda machine while we can be pretty indifferent to horrors on a mass scale when funded, armed and supported by our government.
By my late 1950’s birth, I barely missed the McCarthy hearings, but I was alive for the assassinations, protests and riots of the 1960’s and ’70’s. In my home state of Ohio, I was stunned by the Kent State shootings in 1970. I was appalled at the violence of America, and only slowly caught on to how much it has always been in our national character. As wealth has concentrated so has the corruption–delivering us (and the EU and UK) with bat-$hit-crazy leaders whose toolbox is lies, polarization, fear and violence. I’m afraid all Kirk’s murder means for this country is more of the same.
Script.
MKultra.
Divide at impera game of three-letter agencies.
Ultimately, they are psychomaniacs from the elite cabal at work.
The article seems a whiplash of coherent incoherence, or perhaps incoherent coherence, in either case superimposing the author’s values over uncomfortable realities, but it presents a probably accurate portrayal of where we as a People find ourselves amidst desensitizing polarization and the absence of empathy.
I couldn’t disagree more with the conclusion to this article. 9/11 showed “Our better angels prevailed.” The Patriot Act? The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Destruction of Libya. Bombing of one African country after another. Evermore weapon sales. Evermore support for the Zionist project. Ask the Muslims in America how they felt after 9/11.
The moral compass is broken, and we have lived by the sword and shall die by it.
“McCarthyite” Is this a more gentle version of calling someone a Nazi? We know “Nazi” is so overplayed it had to be time to find another way to disparage another. And by the way, Paul Pelosi getting hammered was about as political as a ham sandwich. But it does balance out your narrative.
“On September 12th [2001], this nation was united in unspeakable tragedy. It didn’t matter what ethnic origin, religion, political affiliation or socioeconomic status you were, we were all united in grief and love. Our better angels prevailed, and may they prevail again.”
Unfortunately, that is not an especially valid description of what followed. The reality was the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, increasing the power and reach of the surveillance state and the distortion of the public narrative around terrorism and valid uses of state power.
Though one could undoubtedly point to many other conflicts and manifestations of violent social polarization (both historical or contemporaneous, and foreign or domestic), given my own primary research interests, I would suggest anyone contemplating direct or vicarious cathartic release through the promotion of ostensibly retributive political violence to watch Paco de Onis’s 2006 documentary “State of Fear: The Truth About Terrorism” (available free on YouTube) regarding the atrocities committed by multiple combatants (from guerrillas to death squads to the military) in the Peruvian internal conflict during the 1980s and 1990s, then realize how little was gained from it, and contemplate whether that is truly the sort of existence one wants to embrace.
Excellent commentary. I agree with the author on his observations.
My concern is the politicalzation of Kirks death. Particularly by US politicians.
The 911 words at the end reminds me of the disastrous US government policies that eventually brought about 911.
The Cuban Revolution was necessary and remains a viable socialist model, hopefully someday without suffocating sanctions. When has an elected socialist survived? Allende, Aristede, Chavez? Hopefully Maduro. Long live the Cuban and Bolivarian Revolutions!
“When has an elected socialist survived?”
Taking “survived” to mean “completed their elected term in office” (since, e.g., Jean-Bertrand Aristide is still alive but was twice overthrown in 1991 and 2004, at least the latter time via confirmed US regime change machinations), there have been several socialist leaders who accomplished this while embracing policy agendas that in some way challenged the US-dominated international order, albeit not always necessarily fulfilling most of their stated objectives while in office. Many of them are not necessarily commonly-known household names outside of their home countries (e.g., the Maoist Prachanda in Nepal and the Marxist-Leninist Demetris Christofias in Cyprus electorally attained power in multi-party liberal democracies, while others who subscribed to less rigidly Marxist, i.e., nationalist or eclectic, variations of socialism such as Father Walter Lini in Vanuatu also managed this feat).
The unconfirmed but hypothetically plausible allegations regarding whether the United States might have given Hugo Chávez and other “Pink Tide” leaders cancer aside (Hugo Gye, “U.S. is Giving South American Leaders Cancer, Claims Chavez as Argentine President de Kirchner Becomes FIFTH to Contract Disease,” The Daily Mail, Dec. 29, 2011), Chávez and some other “Pink Tide” leaders (e.g., Rafael Correa) were able to remain in elected office throughout their lifetimes despite persistent US efforts to contribute to their ouster, even if their political projects have largely ended up sabotaged in the long-run.