Left Voices Speak Clearly on Horror—and Dangers—of Charlie Kirk Assassination
"In scenarios dominated by factional bloodshed, it no longer matters who has the most appealing political program or the largest potential constituency."
In the wake of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk's assassination on Wednesday, some prominent left-wing voices not only condemned the killing, but also explained why no progressive should cheer or support such violence against a political opponent.
In an essay in Jacobin, Ben Burgis and Meagan Day described Kirk's death as "a tragedy and a disaster" that also carries ominous implications for any supporter of left-wing politics.
First, they argued that murdering anyone for their political views is morally wrong, full stop.
"No one should be killed as punishment for political expression, no matter how objectionable," they wrote. "In addition to our basic abhorrence of violence, we are also proponents of democracy, which depends on free speech and open inquiry. Without them, collective self-governance is impossible and tyranny becomes inevitable. Imposing silence on political opponents by brute force... undermines a principle that democratic socialists have always held dear."
Burgis and Day then warned that any kind of descent into violence would not benefit the left in any way.
"In scenarios dominated by factional bloodshed, it no longer matters who has the most appealing political program or the largest potential constituency—only who has the most militant and heavily armed ideologues with the least reluctance to kill," they said. "The left will not win that battle."
In conclusion, they argued, "there is nothing to celebrate here" but "there is much to fear."
Burgis and Day weren't the only left-wing voices to forcefully condemn Kirk's assassination. Writing in The Nation, Jeet Heer warned that Kirk's shooting could be the start of a spasm of political violence across the country akin to the infamous "Years of Lead" in Italy.
Additionally, Heer warned that President Donald Trump appears to be a uniquely dangerous figure to lead the US through this time given that he has long relished pouring gas on fires rather than trying to turn down the temperature.
"In terms of political violence, he's an arsonist, not a firefighter," Heer wrote. "He mocked the assault on Paul Pelosi and joked about 'Second Amendment people' going after Hillary Clinton. He has hailed the January 6 rioters as heroes... There's every reason to think that, as he did in recent National Guard deployments in Los Angeles and Washington, DC, Trump will use the Kirk killing to justify an authoritarian crackdown."
Heer ended his piece by writing that the "killing of Kirk was an atrocity that should be condemned without reservation," before warning that "Democrats have to be prepared to resist any onslaught against civil liberties, not least because a crackdown will only increase the likelihood of far worse violence."
Noting the attacks on Pelosi and various others—including Trump, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, Congressman Steve Scalise (R-La.), and Minnesota Speaker of the House Melissa Hortman (D) and her husband—US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) warned in a Thursday video that Kirk’s assassination “is part of a disturbing rise in political violence that threatens to hollow out public life and make people afraid of participating” in a democracy.
Lisa Gilbert and Robert Weissman, the co-presidents of Public Citizen, decried the assassination of Kirk as antithetical to a free and democratic society, while also warning of dangers that it presents to progressives.
"Every act of political violence threatens a worsening cycle that is fundamentally antithetical to democracy and popular rule," they said. "Murder does more than illegitimately silence the voice of the targeted person. Heightened threat levels make others pull back or drop out. Rational if heated discourse is displaced by fear and intimidation. Chaos is used to justify political crackdowns. Ultimately, guns rule instead of the people."
