Contemplations on Violence and Compassion

Moving On in an Enlightened Way after the Assassination of Charlie Kirk

Please bear with me as I muddle through this, as I’ve struggled to process my feelings and gain clarity and direction after the recent violence last week.  I should start by stating clearly that violence is never the answer when it comes to finding sustainable solutions and moving forward.  We’re a divided nation right now, and the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk continues to widen the gap.  As long as we’re divided, we cannot begin to solve the many problems we face as a nation and as a world, so we must find a way to come together at some point, and violence is not going to facilitate that.

I had never heard of Charlie Kirk before he was killed, except in association with a quote attributed to him when he told Taylor Swift that she wasn’t in charge and to submit to her soon to be husband.  It did not inspire me to get to know him better.  When he was killed, my first thought was that no one deserved that, whatever the circumstances.  I didn’t initially connect him with the Taylor quote until later, but even if I had, my anti-violence stance would not have changed. 

Initially, all I heard about Kirk was complimentary, how he was a devout Christian, a family man, someone who had reached out to engage in a dialogue with today’s youth and encourage them to seek God.  He was described as a conservative and Trump supporter, a podcaster, and a good Christian.  Someone close to me who also had never heard of him before his death read about him and afterwards, described him as a remarkable man and a good, good Christian, so I decided to read more about him.

What I found provoked an entirely different reaction than the person who had touted him as being so wonderful.  After reading some of his quotes and watching a couple of his videos, my response was entirely opposite, and I wondered if our sources of information were so different, or if our ideals and values were further apart than I’d realized.  Still, I never wavered on my belief that, regardless of what Kirk did, said, or believed, he did not deserve to be gunned down.  I stand by that. 

Once the initial shock passed, other articles, opinions, and news stories advanced that painted Kirk in a not so shiny suit of armor.  Most agreed that the violence was unacceptable, but they pointed out that he had verbally encouraged or alluded to violence while he was alive, whether or not he himself had engaged in it.  I see no point in rehashing these things, as I’m sure most of you have heard views from both sides of the story, both positive and negative.  If not, they’re easy to find if you want more information about the man and his work. 

Then came the rush of social media responses, and frankly, I found many of those almost as disturbing as both Kirk’s work and the violence committed against him.  There were celebrations regarding his death and suggestions that it was his own fault and that he deserved it.  There were many uses of quotations, including Kirk saying that deaths due to gun violence were necessary and acceptable in order to preserve our right to bear arms.  The haters had a field day with that one, one of them writing, “Wish granted.”  Another widely circulated quote was his statement that members of the LGBTQ+ community should be dealt with the way they were treated in the 50’s and 60’s when they were forced into institutions, suffered through lobotomies, and were victims of violence themselves.  Many thought and stated that his execution was fitting and tied in with his own beliefs.  Isn’t that a little like saying a rape victim deserved to be raped because of the clothes she was wearing?  Victims of violence, regardless of the circumstances, do not ask for or deserve the violence they encounter.  The fault lies squarely with the perpetrator of the violence, always.  No one else is to blame.

Then there were the remarks made that blamed Democrats, liberals, and woke people for Kirk’s death.  I have yet to come across anything but condolences issued by the Democrats.  Did I miss something?  Again, it seems to me the person to blame is the man who shot him.  I think it’s more likely some people are trying to politicize and weaponize this already violent situation for their own gain and to suit their own agendas. 

Political violence has been on the rise for a while now, and it hasn’t only been the conservatives who have been targeted.  Two Democratic lawmakers and one of their spouses were gunned down and killed, the other spouse seriously injured.  We can go back to even before the last election when Nancy Pelosi’s husband was nearly killed and put in the hospital by a man who was moved to violence against the lawmaker.  As I recall, Donald Trump, Jr. thought it was worthy of a joke and showed a hammer and pair of men’s underwear and labeled it as his Halloween costume, going as Nancy Pelosi’s husband.  There were two attempts on Trump’s life made before the election.  The CDC was attacked, some of the Supreme Court justices have been targets, and the number of threats of violence that have been made against so many are more than can be easily counted.  So, if the people who commit violence, condone violence, or make jokes about it think they’re in any way helping the situation, they are clearly mistaken.  There is no justification for any of it, and if you’re among those who support or excuse it, try to justify it in any sense, you’re part of the problem.  Stop it!

I read an article written by the young man who had been asking the question about gun violence and the trans population, who was challenging Kirk about his statement that there was a rise in violence form trans people when he was shot and killed.  He was struggling, because he’d been right there.  He hated what Kirk had said and represented, and he was prepared to support his view with mathematics and statistics to prove Kirk’s statement was wrong when the assassination took place.  He was still angry with the propaganda and false statements Kirk had made, but he was equally angry with the show of violence that took his life.  He stated loudly and clearly that killing him did not help the overall cause or goal to refute what Kirk stood for, and he was horrified that it had come to that. 

One newscaster was fired for suggesting that Kirk’s work and words led to his death, and another prominent newscaster said she was going to renew her commitment to persecute the trans community due to Kirk’s murder.  Now, tell me, what did the trans community have to do with Kirk’s death?  Once again, the perpetrator of the assassination was one man, and the blame for the action belongs with him only.  We can debate what brought him to that point and that hatred promotes more hatred and that gun control laws could’ve prevented Kirk’s death and that the family unit has disintegrated and that mental health is at issue and, and, and, but the fact of the matter is that one man killed another man for reasons only known to him, and that there is no justification for that act.

I read that the governor of Utah said that this act of violence could and should lead to a renewed commitment to learn to “disagree better,” and I thought, finally, a light in the midst of so much darkness.  We don’t have to agree on everything, but we do need to learn how to agree to disagree.  Disagreement should not and does not have to mean hatred, violence, and an identification of enemies, much less targets, and we should all keep that in mind. 

Charlie Kirk does not inspire hope or admiration in me, but I can find compassion for him, and I’m sure that, among the many things he said and did that I disagree with, he probably did some good things, too, of which I’m unaware.  He left behind a wife and two little kids who will grow up without a father, and that inspired compassion, as well.  The man who killed him does not inspire hope or admiration in me, either, but I can find compassion for him that he could be so lost and far gone that he could cross that line and take another’s life.  He probably did some good things in his life, also, before he became a murderer.  Nobody is all good or all bad.  I believe it was his uncle who recognized him in the picture circulating and his father who turned him in to the authorities, and I can find compassion for them, as well.  I can’t imagine how hard that must’ve been.  Kirk’s life was ended, and for all practical purposes, so did the shooter’s life when he ended it.  Although there are no others involved in the act itself, plenty of others have been hurt by it and will continue to hurt.  I can find compassion for them.

Finding compassion for Kirk and his murderer in no way means that we agree with, condone, accept, or excuse their actions.  It’s a choice we can make, or not.  If we choose to wallow in the anger, hatred, fear, and judgment surrounding us, we not only compromise our own peace of mind, but we add to the problem.  I’d rather be part of finding a solution.  Violence is never the answer, and the vitriol, finger pointing, blaming, targeting, malicious joking, and persecution of others only adds to it, so if you need time to process the anger and shock and horror, by all means take it, but in the meantime, don’t contribute to the problem.  I hope with time, we can begin to heal, not only from this terrible incident and its fallout, but also from the desire to continue to hurt each other in various ways.  Let’s take some time to regroup, and afterwards, maybe we can all look for a better way to disagree as well as move forward.