Sadness and shame haunt our nation in the aftermath of the political assassination of conservative Charlie Kirk. A bullet fired from a rifle ended the life of the 31-year-old who rose to fame touring college campuses to promote free speech and debate. He leaves behind a wife and two children.
Charlie was a hero to millions of young people in Generation Z (13-28 years old). Charlie's podcasts, campus appearances and YouTube interviews generated billions of views. His killing leaves the same searing memory for Gen Z as the assassination of President John F. Kennedy did for my generation.
Details of the shooting and the craven assassin have been obsessively covered in the media. There will be no rehashing of the evil that struck down Charlie but failed to silence his movement. However, the shameless exploitation of a human being's death is a stain on the nation.
Videos of people celebrating Charlie's murder peppered social media after the shooting. The Satanic messengers were mostly young, political activists, the disenfranchised, people of color and a few celebrities. The stench of hatred on social media was on full display for the world to see.
Widely circulated memes claimed Charlie wished harm to LGBTQ people. He was racist, homophobic, a fascist and a Nazi. Charlie's quotes were taken out of context to smear his character. Liberal detractors could not stomach Charlie being seen as a martyr.
The corporate news media also performed disgracefully in this dark moment. In the aftermath, news reports labeled Charlie Kirk a right winger whose message incited violence. A reporter on a cable channel insinuated Charlie had it coming because he used "hateful words."
Their characterization exposes how little the media cares about honesty. Charlie appeared on campuses and offered students an opportunity to debate ideas. He was never mean spirited or treated students with disrespect. Characterizing his views "dangerous" exposes the cultural rot in the country.
Imagine the vacuous media calling "hate speech" Charlie telling college kids not to get abortions, to embrace capitalism, to be monogamous, to turn to God, to reject the notion of men competing in women's sports and to love America. Those are traditional Christian values, not extremism.
The dishonest media stooped to new lows once the identity of the shooter was released. Police and the district attorney painted the picture of a radicalized 22-year-old who was in a romantic relationship with a transitioning male. Despite the facts, the media branded the assassin a Trump supporter.
The killer was white and had a gun. In the biased media's view, that screams MAGA. Their characterization fell apart when the alleged assassin's parents recounted their son's descent into leftist dogma. That didn't stop a comedian from asserting the killer was clearly "one of them"--MAGA.
What the venal media should focus on is the increasing political violence in the nation, particularly among Generation Z. A 20-year old shot and wounded President Trump. A 23-year old opened fire at a Minnesota Catholic Church, killing two and wounding 21 parishioners.
The accused killer of the CEO of UnitedHealthCare is 26-years old. Last week's shooter at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Dallas was 29-years-old. Authorities said the killer took his own life after shooting three detainees, including one fatally.
Surveys from 2024 and this year indicate a concerning trend of increased acceptance of violence among young people, especially political violence. While older generations overwhelmingly reject violence, a growing minority of young adults find it acceptable in some circumstances.
A poll this month by YouGov showed among adults under 30, 19% said political violence can sometimes be justified. The Edelman Trust Barometer in January reported its poll found 31% of Gen Z justify violence, property damage and misinformation as means for social change.
Another survey this year by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression polled college students and discovered 34% of these young people say "using violence to stop a campus speech" can be acceptable.
And it's not just political violence that some young people endorse. A study by Psychology of Violence found that 41% of young adults viewed the murder of a CEO to be acceptable. This should trip alarm bells with every parent, teacher, professor and counselor as well as society at large.
Many blame the radicalization of today's young people on social media. It's a convenient scapegoat for the lazy. Virtually every young person in America consumes social media. But only a tiny minority commit murder. Shouldn't we demand personal accountability instead of just blaming algorithms?
The media, educators, parents, the police and politicians should be asking hard questions about the radicalization of Generation Z. How can someone believe that it's okay to kill a person over political or social beliefs? Why is violence happening so often? What can be done to stop it?
It doesn't seem too much to ask that the police reveal the motive of each shooter who commits horrific acts of violence, instead of lapsing into obfuscation. There is a timidness among law enforcement and prosecutors not to assign blame to radicalization or political rhetoric for stoking hatred.
The politicians and media have no shame in finger pointing after each episode. But digging into the profile of shooters, their background, influencers and media consumption could reveal what contributes to violence. Surely terms such as Hitler, Nazi and Gestapo are ammunition for depraved minds.
It is instructive that after Kirk was gunned down, his millions of followers--mostly Generation Z--did not commit acts of vengeful violence. No property was damaged. No buildings were torched. Cars were not set ablaze. There were no angry mobs protesting and assaulting police.
The reaction stands in stark contrast to the property damage and assaults during ICE raids. The burning of Teslas because of the company's CEO politics. The assaults on police officers trying to restore order to the streets during out-of-control protests. Actual violence begets more violence.
Charlie Kirk above all else was an evangelist. He proudly professed his faith in Jesus Christ on college campuses. He called others to return to God and to live out their faith. He would've been proud that his followers refused to bow to hatred by singing hymns, praying and comforting one another.
Their example gives a ray of hope to a nation scarred by violence. Meanwhile, Charlie's legacy has ignited a religious and political awakening that is reverberating throughout the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment