4 reflections on Charlie Kirk’s assassination

Americans are still reeling from the news that an unknown assassin shot and killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk on Wednesday afternoon, as he answered questions from quizzical students at an event at Utah Valley University.

Kirk still believed in the free exchange of ideas — a value all too rare amid partisan media siloes — and acted on that belief. He intentionally invited debates on university campuses, which progressives consider their home turf, and he often acquitted himself well.

It’s impossible to identify the murderer’s motive with certainty while he (or she) remains at large and unidentified. However, the facts do suggest a targeted assassination by someone with firearms training. The assassin fired a single bullet, fatally striking Kirk in the neck; authorities believe the shot was fired from the roof of a building 200 yards away. Considering Kirk’s provocative political persona and his evident domestic tranquility, a political motive for the shooting seems far more likely than a personal one, although it’s too early to flesh this out in detail.

Assuming a political motive is at play, four reflections assemble in the foreground.

Campus Leftists abhor truth

First, it’s worth considering what made Kirk a controversial figure. Kirk spoke the truth — about unborn life, gender and sexuality, and a host of other issues — not just on sympathetic platforms with sympathetic audiences, but he especially spoke the truth where people would disagree with it. He held up the truth to public scrutiny that its soundness would become evident to all. “Prove me wrong,” was his invitation.

This offended Leftists because Kirk took his conservative ideas out of the intellectual ghetto and into common areas of their ivory tower. Leftists have reimagined universities as safe spaces, rubber rooms insulated from triggering ideas, not the institutions of enlightenment that once made these universities great. To that end, an online petition asking university administrators to kick Kirk off campus garnered nearly 1,000 signatures.

In other words, the Leftist-dominated university “darkens counsel by words without knowledge” (Job 38:2), preserving their intellectually feeble ideas not by refuting the arguments of others but by banning them. Jesus taught that such behavior has a moral dimension, “people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed” (John 3:19-20).

Perhaps there are grounds to question Kirk’s method and tone, but these were not ultimately what made him enemies. People hated Kirk because of the truth that he spoke — and because he spoke it in places where they could not avoid hearing it.

Left-wing radicals wanted violence, and they have gotten violence

Earlier this summer, Axios reported “growing anger” among the Democratic base over the inability of their party officials — in the minority in both houses of Congress — to obstruct President Donald Trump’s agenda. The message, conveyed at meetings large and small, was that the Democratic base wanted to see extreme, even violent opposition from their elected leaders. “Our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not good enough,” said one anonymous House Democrat. “There needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public.” Another added, “Some of them have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.”

Left-wing radicals wanted violence, and now they have gotten violence. True, it wasn’t one of their own lawmakers, but those clamoring for a human sacrifice to their idol of politics will likely not be terribly distraught over the fact that the first victim in the arena was a close ally of President Trump.

Recent history has seen so many attempted assassinations that it is a wonder (and a mercy) that America has not had one before now. During the 2024 presidential campaign, President Trump survived two assassination attempts, one of which grazed his ear and killed a bystander. In April, the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion was firebombed while Governor Josh Shapiro (D) and his family were asleep inside. In 2022, a would-be assassin surrendered to authorities outside Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home. In June, two Minnesota state lawmakers were shot, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., was shot in 2017, and Rep. Gabby Giffords (D) in 2011.

Now that Leftist radicals have drawn first blood, they are unlikely to be satisfied with only one assassination; like swarming sharks, the blood in the water will only stoke their appetite into a frenzy. This conclusion follows naturally from the fact that those who live as “slaves to various passions” (Titus 3:3) have no ability to free themselves from the destructive influence of those passions. If this sounds harsh or uncharitable, then yours truly can only offer the challenge of Kirk himself, “Prove me wrong.”

The reality is that America’s political Left has a violence problem — and has had one for some time. That is, a significant number of people in the Leftist camp have such a low opinion of the human dignity of others that they see violence as a legitimate means to achieve a political end. Ironically, Kirk was debating this topic — the Left’s violence problem, particularly the rise of trans-identifying shooters — at the very moment he himself was shot.

Yes, some right-wing extremists are also open to violence. But the unique problem faced by the Left is an apparent inability to recognize (or condemn) the violence within their own ranks, which is the first step towards a solution (fortunately, some progressives have condemned the murder of Charlie Kirk).

In 2021, President Joe Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin launched a department-wide initiative to root out extremists from the U.S. military. Unfortunately, the initiative focused narrowly on right-wing forms of extremism, so that in 2024, one active-duty airman set himself on fire in protest, and an active-duty Marine was arrested for plotting a mass shooting.

By its very nature, political violence — of whatever affiliation — threatens the very core of our republic. Ever since George Washington ceded power to John Adams in 1797, the United States of America have been characterized by the peaceful transition of power.

Such peaceful transition of power rests on a common allegiance to the people as supreme, as well as a common agreement among partisans to make their appeal to that supreme authority and settle the outcome with ballots, not bullets. For centuries, partisans who lost an election could console themselves with the prospect of winning the next one — a prospect they knew would vanish if they forsook the social contract and committed themselves to open violence. The whole endeavor turns on persuasion and the people’s choice; they are entirely inconsistent with a culture of assassination.

Kirk embodied this commitment to persuasion, challenging those who disagreed to open debate for the benefit of other hearers. Kirk bested his debate opponents through superior arguments and rhetorical flair, but he could not best an assassin’s bullet. Thus have violent men assailed the truth they cannot overcome.

This crisis demands conviction, not cowardice

The death of Charlie Kirk brings Americans to a moment of decision. Will his courage inspire men of conviction to stand up and defend the truth against malice, slander and faulty reasoning? Or will the assassin’s bullet cow them back into self-censorship, sequestering their opinions for the ears of like-minded hearers only?

The death of Charlie Kirk is the result of America in crisis, of America bent so deeply over political disagreements that some extremists are even willing to kill over a difference in opinions. This crisis cannot be answered by descending deeper into anger and partisan rancor. A different spirit, a different principle is required to bridge ideological, racial and partisan divides, one that comes not from this world but from the Spirit of God. The Church of Jesus Christ has what America lacks, a hope for breaking down “the dividing wall of hostility … so making peace” (Ephesians 2:14-15). Kirk himself shared this hope, tweeting out as recently as Saturday, “Jesus defeated death so you can live.”

The death of Charlie Kirk will likely provoke an energetic response from the Trump administration. The assassination of a close ally, so soon after his own narrow escapes, will likely trigger Trump’s instincts to loyalty, and his administration has already shown a willingness to tussle with universities over their tolerance of political violence. But this crisis calls for more than a merely political response. Political violence is the result of a moral void, one which only the Gospel of Jesus Christ can fill. The Church has that message, and it must not be silent.

Kirk was not only courageous, but happy

Christians are commanded to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ — not because we hate people and want to spoil their sinful pleasures — but because we do love them, enough to inconvenience ourselves that they too might share in the fullness of life only found in Jesus Christ. This is exactly what Kirk did by taking the unvarnished truth into hotbeds of Leftist radicalism.

“Get married, have kids, and stop partying into oblivion,” Kirk tweeted on July 27. “Leave a legacy, be courageous.” An attached video shows the reason why: after a “Fox & Friends” interview, Kirk’s 3-year-old daughter runs across the set and leaps into his arms.

After her birth, Kirk reflected, “When you look down in your arms and you see your child, all of a sudden everything you’re fighting for, everything that you care about, everything that you are pushing for gets into absolute clarity, absolutely, almost instantaneously and immediately.”

Kirk lived a happy life: in love with his wife, in love with his children, and in love with his Savior. These gave purpose, clarity and fulfillment to his life. He lived by God’s design and found it full of blessing. Can the Leftists who hated him claim to be as happy? Or were they too full of hatred to enjoy God’s good gifts? Did they hate him, in part, because he was happy with God’s design?

Now, as a result of their hatred, Kirk is beyond its reach, having been ushered quickly into the arms of his Savior at the early age of 31.

The moment is simultaneously glorious for Kirk and devastating to his family. Kirk leaves behind a young wife and two young children (ages 3 and 1). One murderous assassin’s bullet tore this happy family irrevocably asunder, and the living are those left to deal with the grief.

Let the Church first show its love by caring for its own. Pray for Charlie’s wife Erika and their two young children.

Originally published at The Washington Stand.