After the Murder of Charlie Kirk

At first I thought I shouldn’t write about this matter, because it is very specific to America which is not my country. But as the weeks have passed some ideas have occurred to me. To avoid using the term “turning point”, I will say that this event has certainly been “a watershed moment”. The situation has been irrevocably changed.

I would recommend reading John Carter and Greg Johnson on the matter, and listening to the Distributist. There have been many other good commentaries, including from the Old Glory Club. From this side of the pond, a southerner made this video and a northerner wrote this short illustration of what might be the truth behind the assassination.

But in all likelihood we will never know the truth. As with JFK we will wonder forever. The deception, if there is one, will be too well-constructed to be definitively unravelled. And really, would it be all that surprising if some fanatical leftist really did do this, and the “official” story is the truth?

For my purposes here, it doesn’t really matter who did the killing. What I find more significant is the ghoulish reaction to it from the Left worldwide - which indicates why I, in Britain, have decided to write about it.

I will also not be talking about Charlie Kirk himself, except to agree with the consensus:

• he was a good and decent man

• many of us were too harsh on him, especially latterly

• his death symbolises the futility of Classical Liberalism

• the evidence seems to show that, while not yet “our guy”, he was well on the way to becoming so. Given his trajectory I suspect that within a couple of years he would have been “with us”.

• that might well be why he was killed. Their golem turning against them would be far more damaging than someone who was always their enemy continuing to be so.

With all of that said, I will get to the matter at hand.

---

In 2017, after Richard Spencer got sucker-punched, I made a video about the incident:

It conveyed my disgust at the glee shown by leftists at the assault, which was inflicted by a masked man who showed up out of the blue and immediately ran away so that his victim was unable to defend himself or retaliate. Such behaviour would once have been seen as cowardly, dishonourable and shameful. In my video I analysed earnestly what seemed to me like a notable revelation that the Left, in 2017, did not care about honour. Well, such things are not revelatory in 2025, which is why I have decided against re-publishing the video.

After the gruesome murder of Charlie Kirk, we have seen much worse from the Left than their glee at Spencer’s misfortune. He was merely punched; Kirk was deprived of most of his natural life-span. This also deprives a wife of her loving husband and two infant children of their loving father. Yes, he was a family man - well-adjusted, stable, accomplished, honest, decent… all the things that so many in fringe politics are not, and that so many on the Left venomously disparage.

Significantly, the vitriol and mockery came not just from hard left activists (antifa) but from “professionals”, including teachers and college lecturers - people of influence and prominence, especially over the young. These are people who had a lot to lose, yet they did not hesitate to come right out and publicly mock an innocent man being brutally murdered. Apparently, they had no idea they had a lot to lose. I am glad that some of them have now learned this, being fired and (hopefully) becoming unemployable. There is a time for charity and there is a time for vengeance, and right now I want to see women in tears and eunuchs on the dole. I feel no guilt for saying this. They made me unemployable for trying to protect my ethnic group; I am very happy for them to be made unemployable for mocking a good man’s brutal murder.

Their behaviour has been truly disgusting. Even before we were told that the murder was left-wing political, they were cheering it. Yet, while cheering it, they desperately wanted to blame it on the Right, falsely claiming (and in some cases knowingly falsely claiming) that the killer was a groyper or some other type of right-winger. So, as ever, they wanted the thing without paying the price for the thing. Similarly, they wanted to celebrate his murder but also to deny celebrating it, since such behaviour is clearly reprehensible. The phrase “he had it coming” was a spineless and honourless euphemism for “he deserved it and I’m glad it happened”. They want to celebrate a brutal murder yet still be thought of as good people - always avoiding the price that must be paid, like children in a sweet shop. But these were adults, and adults in trusted positions in society, adults entrusted with the shaping of our children’s minds and our society’s conventions. Horrifying. We learned, with real-time lessons, that we are surrounded by smirking, giggling, hysterical psychopaths - or people who might as well be.

Meantime, the mainstream media - which leftists always furiously deny is on their side - was absolutely on their side, justifying their celebration of Kirk’s murder by spreading lies about him when his corpse was still warm. Even before his children knew that their daddy was dead, the media worldwide was falsely demonising him. They continued doing this for several days afterward until the public backlash forced them, if not into shame, at least into shameful silence. I say “shameful” because, like the devious little girl who has been found out, they will try again as soon as they think they can get away with it.

The result of all this is a gaping chasm that I doubt will disappear in our lifetimes. Right-wingers surely now see themselves, not as citizens “just like everyone else”, but as the only sane and responsible people around.

In recent essays I have said that the Left is “done”. I meant specifically in the British context but of course it applies to various extents elsewhere, including America. The Left’s reaction to the murder of Charlie Kirk indicates that they might have given up on debating, but not on winning, and they are switching to the more “direct” tactics for which they were once well-known. The gleeful remarks indicate that they are uninterested in debating; they simply want their opponents deleted from the game. Without wishing to trivialise matters, it reminds me of how, once they realised they couldn’t out-argue us, they wanted us simply deleted from social media, and they didn’t care about the ethics of doing so.

In my 2017 video I talked about honour and morality, and opined that a great percentage of the Left simply don’t have any. I think this was naive of me. I also said that they can do all of this because they lack self-reflection. Again, naive. I now think they know exactly what they are doing and are simply much more realistic than we are. At the end of that year, on Millenniyule, Prof. Mike Isaacson unnerved me by saying, in effect, “you must have known that we on the Left would be violent towards you on the Right”. Honestly, I hadn’t known that. Like many on the Right, I genuinely had the innocent belief that a battle of ideas would be won with ideas.

We on the Right tend to think of discourse as a game which you might well lose if it turns out that your opponent has better arguments. This is a pampered, complacent view which can only work when not much is at stake, or when you don’t believe much is at stake. The Left always believe much is at stake, so they have a far more pragmatic approach to discourse. It amounts to: “give your opponent a chance to agree with you, and if he doesn’t, kill him”. You and I might find that disgusting, dishonourable, primitive or even stupid… but many on the Left seem to think, regardless, that it works.

Few of them will actually be prepared to do the deed, but those few will find themselves celebrated, rewarded, defended and protected by the more reserved majority. In the same way that most Muslims are not jihadists but do foster and protect them, most Leftists are not terrorists but… well… just look on social media.

What this means is not that we on the Right should employ such tactics, but that we should be very aware that this is what we are now dealing with. We are not in a discussion any more. We will still persuade some leftists to our side - probably a great number who are disgusted by the behaviour of their cohorts - but we should no longer act with that as our goal. Rather, our goal should be to insist on our worldview and to implement it, not with the hard-won agreement of our opponents, but against their vicious protestations. In other words, our approach should be to plough ahead and let them either join us or be crushed by us. Seeking to reason with them and win them over was the naive, innocent approach of Charlie Kirk, and the fate it led him to has been met with joy and laughter from his enemies - people he probably thought of as future friends.

From now on, we have to accept, believe and act as if we have the moral high ground, because we absolutely do. We are dealing not with adults but with psychological children, and we have to be the parents. And I am not talking about “peaceful parenting”. When they misbehave, we must discipline them, because we are the only adults in the room and if we don’t take command, they will create sheer carnage of our societies. We have intuited this for years and now it has been proven for us in the most disgusting way. We must respond with strength of character and conviction. We must be resolute, resourceful, unabashed and implacable.

This necessitates a drastic change in the attitude of right-wingers, especially conservatives. They are accustomed to being passive, reasonable, etc. That has to end now. It results in letting the Left set the agenda, and that also has to end now.

The conservative’s (sometimes sincere) justification for this submissive behaviour is that we should “take the moral high ground” and not “descend to the level of our opponents”. Well, this is a war. In a war, there is being respectful towards your enemy, and there is handing him your weaponry and hoping for the best. We can be decent without being suicidal.

We must keep in mind, always, that the Left really are our enemy, and we should behave around them as around a rabid dog: never relax, never trust, never give an inch.

We must drag people to our position by magnetism, success and sanity, not by seeking the Left’s approval but by mocking it.

Above all, our predisposition to look for ways we can compromise and give in to them and avoid conflict, to look for sacrifices we can make so as to show that we mean well… all of that has to end. Our assumption that they, not we, have the authority to decide society’s fate has to be extinguished.

Most of all, our fear of acquiring and using state power must be overcome. Our societies are being destroyed and it is in no small part because of that attitude among right-wingers. From the ardent libertarian to the sleepy conservative, we must become comfortable with the idea of obtaining power and shamelessly using it to change society, because the Left certainly are comfortable with it. They might be naive about everything but power, and conservatives tend to be the inverse. Power is the only way anything gets done in the world. You either have it and use it, or you are subject to other people having it and potentially - or really - using it against you. To submit to that and to justify doing so on the grounds of some abstract principle is not courage but cowardice.

For a list of other traits of which we should try to purge ourselves, watch Academic Agent.

Voices, on both the Left and the Right, now calling for “calm” and “reconciliation” should be ignored. I give Erika Kirk a pass here. At her husband’s memorial service, she said she has forgiven his killer. Well, let her be the grieving widow, and let her do what she feels she must in order not to be tormented by hatred throughout her remaining decades, but the rest of us should not emulate her. We should be tough.

Matt Walsh has pledged solidarity with anyone on the Right. I don’t know whether he would include the likes of us in that pledge, but I think we should behave as if he does, until and unless he demonstrates otherwise. I would strongly discourage attacking him for any of his past pronouncements. Anyone who makes such a pledge should be rewarded for it. We are going to need all the solidarity we can get, and anyone pushing purity spiralling is wasting everyone else’s time and making our defeat more likely.

The end goal should not be the building of temporary successes but the permanent destruction of the Left’s ability to reproduce itself. This means changing the social mores of everyday life to sane, eugenic ones. It might well mean dismantling the university system as it now is, a factory of leftist indoctrination. It will require changing laws, banning organisations, defunding or even abolishing institutions, and shaming or even imprisoning individuals. It will not come naturally to us as right-wingers but if we falter, we will lose Western civilisation. Moreover, even lukewarm measures will enrage the Left and prompt violent response from them. Escalation is now unavoidable, so the sooner we shift to top gear, the better.

Three years before that 2017 video, I made another one which now seems relevant. It was at the start of my channel, a more naive time even than 2017, let alone 2025, but nevertheless the title of that video was:

I think recent events have vindicated this title and drawn that future necessity quite a bit closer.

These people might not literally be evil, but if not they are certainly possessed by evil, blinded by it, drunk on it. Left to their own devices, they will maniacally destroy everything good, true and beautiful. That is all they have ever worked towards, all our lives.

They might be spiritually kids, but we have been kidding ourselves.