Death of a Salesman
Charlie Kirk’s superpower was bringing people together. He was a uniter. He spent his entire life traveling the country and seeking out conversations with other people - even if they didn’t always see eye-to-eye. He was a voice for compromise and an advocate for finding common ground between people with different political beliefs.
At 18 years old, Kirk partnered with a Tea Party millionaire to found Turning Point USA - an organization he described as “standing behind free markets and limited government.” But he wasn’t afraid to reach across the aisle and engage with people who held different views. That’s why he got in touch with Foster Friess, a born-again Christian billionaire whose socially conservative beliefs didn’t necessarily align with Kirk’s fiscally conservative libertarianism. But thanks to Kirk’s passion for civil dialog, they were able to come to an agreement: Foster Friess became a major donor, and Kirk abandoned his previous support for the separation of church and state.
Donald Trump’s protectionist, pro-tariff economic philosophy and authoritarian tendencies were also at odds with Turning Point’s focus on “free markets and limited government.” But as Trump gained power in the Republican Party, Kirk did what he did best: he sat down and he talked to Trump and his campaign staff. He listened to them. And over the next ten years, he and his small government, free market group became some of Trump’s biggest supporters, even backing his false claim that the 2020 election had been stolen and chartering buses to take protestors to Trump’s rally on January 6th.
Charlie Kirk’s commitment to civil debate and overcoming political differences was how he was able to unite fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, and MAGA conservatives into a single movement, all driving toward a common goal. The only Republican constituency he wasn’t able to bring into the fold were the overt white nationalists, who considered him insufficiently racist. But a recent memorial rally held in his honor by several Orange County Nazi groups suggests that they’re finally coming around.
Even in death, Charlie Kirk is still uniting people.
Personally, I always thought he sucked shit. That should come as no surprise to anyone - he spent his entire career mocking and antagonizing people and causes I care about in order to gain social media clout. Lots of conservatives show up at college campuses and say inflammatory stuff to try and get a rise out of students. Crossing your arms and smirking while getting yelled at by an English lit major doesn’t make you Socrates, and to me the only difference between Kirk and the street preachers who’d come to my college to tell us we were going to Hell was that he had the financial backing of several extremely rich old creeps.
None of that means I think it’s a good thing that he got shot. I think political violence is bad. I think gun violence is bad. I think it’s tragic that his wife lost her husband and his kids lost their father. And he clearly meant a lot to a whole lot of people. I don’t begrudge anybody who wants to mourn his loss. But he spent 13 years crowing about how people like me are sick freaks who hate America, so I’m not going to pretend he was some champion of well-reasoned political debate just because he died a shocking and violent death.
This has been a tough pill to swallow for Kirk’s supporters. When confronted with quotes from Kirk where he claims that the Civil Rights Act was a mistake, or calls for Joe Biden to be executed, or talks about stoning gay people to death, his fans get very concerned about context.
I’m having a hard time with that, because even when you listen to the entirety of his quotes, they’re still pretty gross. For example: if you read the literal context of his quote about stoning, you’d see that he doesn’t directly call for public stonings. He instead identifies the Bible verse Leviticus 18 as calling for gay men to be stoned to death, and then refers to it as “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.” If you’re a member or an ally of the queer community, this additional context - that he merely endorsed stoning gay people to death, rather than outright advocated for it - probably doesn’t do much to change your opinion of the man.
But that’s because you’re not looking at the quote with the context his fans want you to. When people online, in the media, or in the federal government scold you for taking his quotes out of context, they don’t mean “you need to read that quote in the context of everything else he was saying.” They mean, “you need to read that quote in the context of being a person who likes and agrees with Charlie Kirk.”
In order to properly appreciate Charlie Kirk’s wisdom, you simply have to pretend you’re someone who isn’t too fussed about whether members of a marginalized community should be executed or not. If you don’t get hung up on his role in a right-wing political party that is actively hostile to LGBTQ people, there’s really nothing offensive about what he said. If you put yourself in the headspace of someone who is being algorithmically served terabytes of right wing content 18 hours a day, you’d actually be delighted at how cleverly he skewered the person he was criticizing (beloved children’s entertainer Ms. Rachel). Basically, if you just put aside all of your lived experiences and moral convictions that lead you to disagree with Charlie Kirk, he’s actually a pretty agreeable guy.
I try to be respectful of other people’s cultures, but that is a level of wokeness I cannot and will not achieve. If Charlie Kirk was such a brilliant, eloquent messenger, you’d think he would’ve said at least one or two things that could have value and meaning regardless of your political affiliation. But that wasn’t his job. His job was owning the libs.
I’m not celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death. And I’m not going to celebrate his life.