Re: Students gather for Charlie Kirk vigil
Charlie Kirk’s death was a tragedy just as any untimely death is. Political violence is never cause for celebration, but acknowledging a tragedy is not the same as demanding reverence from those he harmed.
In response to his death, centrists — as well as groups on our own campus — have recently taken to venerating Kirk, with Ezra Klein proclaiming that he “was practicing politics the right way.” This is dangerous framing because it ignores the serious damage Kirk caused and the groups he openly victimized. Throughout his career, Kirk promoted policies and worldviews that demeaned transgender youth, dehumanized immigrants and ultimately bolstered Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential bid which has already rolled back protections for LGBTQ+ individuals and immigrants alike. When we speak of loss, we cannot ignore the transgender children Kirk spoke against and in some instances openly called to be bullied.
We can condemn political violence without venerating its victims. Kirk’s death does not absolve him of the harm that he’s caused.
Particularly disturbing narratives from this week’s vigil on campus have painted Kirk as a martyr. Not only is this characterization misleading, but it’s offensive to those who still suffer from the outcomes of Kirk’s politics. A martyr dies fighting for a higher cause; Kirk’s brand of politics pitted Americans against each other, openly calling the 1964 Civil Rights Act a “mistake.” These pieces of legislation mark pivotal moments in American history in which we have chosen to do the right thing, realizing our values of equal rights and freedom for all. To frame Kirk as a martyr risks sanctifying his dangerous, disenfranchising brand of politics.
We should condemn the act that took Kirk’s life, but we should also prevent acts to whitewash his legacy or cast him as some sort of hero for free speech.
Letters to the editor represent the views of their author(s), which are not necessarily those of The Dartmouth.
