Charlie
Kirk Assassination Raises Fear of Surging Political Violence
Initial
expressions of grief and shock were overtaken by open calls for reckoning and
vengeance, as some proclaimed the country was on the brink of civil war.
Richard
Fausset Ken
Bensinger Alan Feuer
By
Richard FaussetKen Bensinger and Alan Feuer
Sept. 10,
2025
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/10/us/charlie-kirk-political-violence.html
Even
before the assassination of Charlie Kirk, an influential right-wing activist,
there were signs of a looming political crisis. Rising polarization and the
coarsening of public discourse left little room for shared understanding. Acts
of violence, targeting figures on the left and the right, had begun piling up.
But the
killing of Mr. Kirk on a Utah college campus on Wednesday — shortly after he
began speaking to a young crowd on a sunny afternoon — raises the possibility
that the country has entered an even more perilous phase.
On social
media, it was easy to find left-wing posters reveling in Mr. Kirk’s death and
suggesting he got what he deserved. On the right, initial expressions of grief
and shock were overtaken by open calls for political reckoning and vengeance.
There were ominous proclamations that the country was on the brink of civil war
— or should be.
The
outbursts worried experts, who warned that Americans’ tolerance for politically
motivated attacks has been growing at a striking pace.
“We’re
basically a tinderbox of a country,” said Robert Pape, a political science
professor at the University of Chicago who has been conducting regular polls to
measure attitudes toward political violence since supporters of President Trump
attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. “We are seeing more radicalized politics
and more support for violence than at any point since we’ve been doing these
studies in the past four years.”
The
shooting of Mr. Kirk, 31, was captured from multiple angles on video; gruesome
footage of blood spurting from his neck quickly went viral. A few days earlier,
many Americans had watched similarly disturbing footage of a young public
transit rider in Charlotte, N.C., who was stabbed to death by a stranger in an
unprovoked attack.
That
killing had become entangled in an escalating national debate over Mr. Trump’s
desire to send the military into Democratic-led cities to combat crime. In a
country where the president calls his opponents “scum,” and opponents accuse
him of fascism, it already seemed to many that the fabric of public discourse
had hopelessly frayed.
Mr. Kirk,
who was prolific on social media, was himself deeply engaged in the
conversation about crime, posting on X just hours before he was shot that it
was “100% necessary to politicize” the Charlotte murder.
“I think
that you have a cultural civil war underway,” said Newt Gingrich, the
Republican former House speaker, in an interview on Wednesday afternoon. Mr.
Gingrich said he fully supported Mr. Trump’s efforts to upend the American
status quo. But he acknowledged that they were rocking the ship of state.
“You have
very profound differences about the very basics of life,” he said, referring to
partisan divisions. “And the country has not figured out how to sort it all out
yet. We felt like we were under enormous pressure from the Obama-Biden cycle.
The left feels like it’s under tremendous pressure from the Trump cycle. And we
don’t know how this is all going to play out.”
Among
those studying the public’s appetite for political violence — a fast-growing
discipline in American academia — the mood on Wednesday was grim.
In Dr.
Pape’s most recent survey in May, nearly 39 percent of Democrats agreed with
the idea that removing Mr. Trump from office by force was justifiable. At the
same time, nearly a quarter of Republicans said it was justifiable for Mr.
Trump to use the military to crack down on protests against his agenda.
Garen
Wintemute, a physician and the director of the Violence Prevention Research
Program at University of California, Davis, argued that a spiraling cycle of
violence is not a foregone conclusion.
“The task
we face now is to not let the people at the extremes pull the rest of us over
the edge with them,” Dr. Wintemute said. “We need to make our rejection of
political violence clear.”
Mr. Kirk
was a committed partisan. In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, Matthew
Dowd, a political analyst on MSNBC, called him a “divisive” figure who had
engaged in “hate speech.”
“You
can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these
awful words and not expect awful actions to take place,” Mr. Dowd said on the
air. “And that’s the unfortunate environment we are in.”
Rebecca
Kutler, the MSNBC president, called Mr. Dowd’s comments “insensitive and
unacceptable.”
At first,
many right-wing commentators expressed their shock through calls for prayer.
Mr. Kirk was a Christian, and many popular influencers share his faith. Benny
Johnson, a podcaster who in the past worked at Turning Point USA, the
organization co-founded and run by Mr. Kirk, called on his followers to “get
down on your knees and pray.”
But after
news emerged that Mr. Kirk had not survived, Mr. Johnson’s tone, along with
that of many others on the political right, took a decidedly dark turn. Mr.
Johnson called television news anchors “demons,” proclaimed that he was
“burning with righteous anger” and said that Mr. Kirk was a martyr.
On
conservative Fox News, Jesse Watters, the popular prime-time TV personality,
spoke passionately about the attack, and the need to somehow strike back.
“We’re
sick, we’re sad, we’re angry, and we’re resolute, and we’re going to avenge
Charlie’s death in the way Charlie would want it to be avenged,” he said on
Wednesday.
Mr.
Watters listed a number of threatening or violent acts perpetrated in recent
years by the people on the left: the armed man arrested in 2022 who wanted to
kill the Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh. The shooting of two Israeli
Embassy aides in Washington in May. The vandalizing of Teslas to protest Mr.
Trump’s sometime ally, Elon Musk. The 2017 shooting of Representative Steve
Scalise, a Louisiana Republican.
“Whether
we want to accept it or not, they are at war with us!” Mr. Watters said. “And
what are we going to do about it? How much political violence are we going to
tolerate?”
Federal
and local authorities have not yet identified a suspect in the shooting, yet
the far-right activist Laura Loomer, with no evidence, called it a
“professional hit.”
Matt
Forney, a right-wing journalist known for racist and misogynistic content,
called Mr. Kirk’s assassination “the American Reichstag fire,” alluding to the
1933 fire at the German Parliament building that was used by the Nazi party as
a pretext to suspend constitutional protections and arrest political opponents.
“It is
time for a complete crackdown on the left. Every Democratic politician must be
arrested and the party banned,” Mr. Forney wrote on X.
Alex
Jones, the proprietor of the conspiracy theory, posted a video online
declaring, “Make no mistake — we are at war.” And Chaya Raichik, a right-wing
internet celebrity best known for her popular Libs of TikTok account on X,
posted similarly, “This is war.”
On
Patriots.win, a far-right website where some of Mr. Trump’s most fevered
supporters have gathered for years, the violent language included posts like,
“Start the Democrat extinction event.”
Still,
one prominent right-wing figure, Nick Fuentes, a notorious racist and
antisemite, beseeched his followers to be calm amid the persistent calls for
violence.
“The
violence and hatred has to stop,” he wrote. “Our country needs Christ now more
than ever.”
Ruth
Braunstein, an associate professor of sociology at Johns Hopkins University who
studies political violence and polarization, said she was concerned that the
slaying of someone she described as a “pivotal figure” on the American right
could mobilize groups that have been waiting for just such a catalyst.
“The
right, she said, “has well-organized and trained groups, including militia
organizations, that are basically waiting for a moment to be called into action
in defense of what they view as the nation.”
She
added, “All it will take is the slightest hint from the political leaders,
including the president, but also anyone else, that this is the moment that
they’re needed.”
Though
Mr. Trump has engaged in the most incendiary rhetoric of any president in
recent memory, his initial reaction to
the news was restrained. He ordered flags across the country lowered to
half-staff until Sunday.
On Truth
Social, he praised Mr. Kirk as “legendary” and offered his sympathy to his wife
and family.
Later,
though, Mr. Trump blamed Mr. Kirk’s murder on the news media and the “radical
left” for “demonizing those with whom you disagree.”
“For
years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie
to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals,” Trump said. “This
kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in
our country today, and it must stop right now.”
In the
Rio Grande Valley on Wednesday, Sergio Sanchez, a longtime conservative radio
host and former chair of the Hidalgo County Republican Party, spoke through
tears as he accused some liberals of “perpetuating and promoting this culture
of hate and violence.”
Mr.
Sanchez also pined for what he believed was a better and simpler chapter in the
American story.
“I’m a
kid of the late ’80s,” he said. “I remember a time in America when we would
live and let live. And I don’t recognize our nation anymore.”
Richard
Fausset, a Times reporter based in Atlanta, writes about the American South,
focusing on politics, culture, race, poverty and criminal justice.
Ken
Bensinger covers media and politics for The Times.
Alan
Feuer covers extremism and political violence for The Times, focusing on the
criminal cases involving the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and against former
President Donald J. Trump.


Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário