BULLETS AND BALLOTS: The Legacy of Charlie Kirk.
Behind all of this was one overarching message: Do not fear. You have truth behind you. An entire fellowship of young conservatives stands behind you too. Charlie is here today to show you that conservatives like you can stand tall in hostile spaces. You can also do this. You should also do this. They do not own the public square. You do not need to be afraid.
That was the message of the man who was murdered this week.
This message had an obvious corollary: if we show up, then we will win. Recall that Trump did not win the 2016 popular vote. This caused a lot of nihilism among young conservatives. Many believed that the American people were too corrupted for a conservative movement to win majority support. Others thought that the American power structure—the en vogue term was “the cathedral”—would never allow a fair fight and would grind actual resistance to dust. He who believes thus either retreats from the public entirely or looks to less democratic solutions to the nation’s problems.
Charlie Kirk thought otherwise. He insisted that conservative populists could win the fight for the public square even if that fight was rigged against them. This faith was the foundation of his public persona and the engine that propelled the organizations he led. Kirk went out of his way to debate his ideas openly with opponents from the other camp. As a true populist leader should, he moved among the people, constantly talking with ordinary citizens of all persuasions. Kirk thought in terms of ballots, not bullets. When many to his right fantasized about Caesar and Sulla, he chased votes. He did not think nationalists needed to adopt extreme measures to win. Persuasion and mobilization—the traditional tools of self-government—would be enough.
Kirk saw America as he saw college campuses: the problem was not that America lacked conservatives or populists, but that too many of the conservatives it had were inexperienced, apathetic, or afraid. All they needed was an invitation to show up. The organizations Kirk built did this inviting.
These were the methods of the man who was murdered [last] week.
Related: Charlie Kirk saw himself as holding back a revolution.
In the wake of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, there was a brief moment where people of both parties seemed to hope that it would mark a change in direction for the course of the country – an end to the demonization of the other side, a tamping down on the tone of our virulent political debate. That was as fleeting as an election cycle. But now with Kirk’s bloody violent murder while doing exactly the same thing he encouraged so many young people to do – using free-speech rights to stand up for what they believe, publicly and without fear of debate with the other side – the lesson many on the right may take away is that there is no future for such engagement.
The consequences of such a move would break from Kirk’s mission, and serve to accept the message the American left, from its most powerful elites to its core electorate, has been sending loud and clear since 2016: that there is no place for Republican views in society, that they are Nazis and fascists and existential threats, people who should be hounded and punched, and whose deepest pain is your path to joy. And why shouldn’t they take that lesson? There is no purpose to debate when at the end, the other side just wants you dead all the more. Can we even share a country with these people who hate us so much?
The reason not to take that path is because it’s the opposite of what Kirk himself believed and exemplified, as he told us over and over again. In a profile in Deseret published on the eve of his fall campus tour just last week, he vocalized his purpose as calling his fans and fellow young conservatives to something higher than just hating the other side:
“My job every single day is actively trying to stop a revolution,” Kirk said. “This is where you have to try to point them toward ultimate purposes and toward getting back to the church, getting back to faith, getting married, having children. That is the type of conservatism that I represent, and I’m trying to paint a picture of virtue, of lifting people up, not just staying angry.”
The worst thing the young American right could do now in this moment is turn Charlie Kirk’s martyrdom into a lesson fundamentally at odds with his mission. Really, after all this, could you blame them? The American left hated Charlie Kirk. They mocked his approach to debate. They smeared him for his conservative beliefs. But they and the country may be about to learn what comes next, and learn it hard.
More: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination Flipped a Remarkable Switch in the MAGA Movement.
