This essay was written for publication in the Mackinac Center’s IMPACT magazine and slightly modified here for the West Michigan Policy Forum’s e-newsletter.
There is a tendency to lionize and laud the dead, but the emotional outpouring for Charlie Kirk was of a scale seldom seen. Charlie’s hidden killer assassinated him with a single shot in front of 3,000 young people, guaranteeing that his death would be remembered for two things — the grisly act itself, and his survivors’ responses.
Perhaps no fallen public figure in recent memory has evoked such a breadth and depth of mourning, or inspired so many hundreds of vigils, as the leader of Turning Point USA. That’s not because Kirk’s was the only high profile assassination in their lifetimes. It’s because his assassination was so unlike most others.
Public assassination victims usually fall into one of three categories — someone with government power, the object of a grudge (such as UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, who was recently murdered on a Manhattan sidewalk), or a representative member of a targeted group (such as the lovely young couple gunned down not long ago outside a Washington Jewish center).
Charlie Kirk fit none of these types so much as another, much rarer, fourth category. He was simply a man with a voice and a following. We have to remember all the way back to the 1968 assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. to find another killing like Kirk’s. King’s movement was much bigger, which may be only one reason his assassination changed a nation.
The other reason is what most of us share with both Kirk and King. We want a voice, and we want our ideas to have a following.
In their despicable killings, we can likewise see ourselves potentially targeted for merely speaking our minds and trying to find others who might agree with us. Those are basic human desires, and ones fiercely protected by American law and tradition. I bet even many who didn’t agree with Kirk very much were glad to see someone brave enough to try to break a one-sided political stranglehold on college campuses. He debated to win, but not to destroy. He was sharp, but not cruel.
Minutes after Kirk’s death was announced publicly, I wrote in part to the Mackinac Center team:
“Many people we know supported Charlie Kirk and felt a strong connection to him. They are shocked and grieving. Some of them may feel angry and vengeful. In addition to the devastation felt by his family and closest friends, his huge following ensures that unpredictable social and political consequences will flow.
“Nevertheless, our job now is to be the alternative to any ensuing chaos, confusion, violence, disorder, and just general wickedness. We are in the business of sometimes standing on a stage and saying true but unpopular things, and we will stay in that business. Fearlessly. The people who count on us will know that they aren’t alone, crazy, beaten, or powerless.
“Everyone who attends [our events this week] will see us model our best effort at exercising free speech, persuasion, discourse, and civility.”
Charlie Kirk was making America better. We can make the country yet better by following his example of courage and devotion, and by respecting the dignity of our opponents.
Joseph G. Lehman is president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
The Mackinac Center for Public Policy is a nonprofit research and educational institute that advances the principles of free markets and limited government. Through our research and education programs, we challenge government overreach and advocate for a free-market approach to public policy that frees people to realize their potential and dreams.
Please consider contributing to our work to advance a freer and more prosperous state.
