( This is from Harvard Salient excerpted via Rorate. The essay is spot on and excellent overall. If you don’t understand the gravity of this, with anything that is laid out here, you had better get your head around it. 9/10 should have been your wake-up call. This very topic was discussed yesterday during the recording of The Barnhardt Podcast #234, at the 28:00-32:00 minute timestamp. -nvp)
 |
| Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erika, raises Charlie’s necklace to wellwishers |
The End of Illusion: On the Assassination of Charlie Kirk and the Way Forward
By Richard Y. Rodgers and David F.X. Army
… (excerpts by Rorate)
[Kirk] could also be unexpectedly, almost annoyingly, moderate: a man who prized argument over obliteration, outreach over insularity, whose modus operandi was to cross campus thresholds and address anyone curious enough to ask a question. He exhorted a generation, plainly and insistently, to love God, love their family, and love their country. That was enough to get him killed.
Let us be unsentimental about the nature of the enemy. Leftism is not merely a rival policy set or an alternate party program. Leftism is a mental illness. There is no risk in naming the condition plainly when the symptoms are so evident: systematic hatred for inherited institutions, a taste for moral monstrosity, and a bloodlust that sanctifies obliteration—of traditions, of customs, of human life—as signs of progress. If you are on the Right and have been told this language is excessive, look instead at the evidence of behavior: celebration when opponents are deplatformed, undone—or worse—killed. They hate you. They want you dead. To say it this way is necessary, for it is in the flowery meadows of euphemism that rot truly spreads.
This is not a rhetorical flourish. It is a warning. To those who treat conservative life on campus or in civic society as an agreeable pastime—“a club,” “a journal,” “a debating society”—recognize that there is no safe neutral. The adjective “just” in front of any conservative endeavor is an attempt to be dismissed as harmless, but it is precisely the seemingly harmless that activists of the other persuasion seek to erase first. If you wear your conviction visibly, if you sign your name to a cause, if you instruct others in the habits that sustain a free and ordered society, you place yourself on the line, and, if the Left wins, they will place you on the gallows. That is not martyr rhetoric; that is realism.
For those of conservative disposition who wish only to lead a private life, cloistered away from the political fray, I am sorry. That is not possible. They won’t allow it. The logic of our hour is simple: if our institutions and formative practices fall, the private life you cherish will be the first to go. To wish for quiet while our enemies reconfigure the moral architecture of the nation is to wish for exile in place.
And yet, despair is not an option. Charlie’s death must not be allowed to calcify into a paralyzing fatalism. It must harden into a militant diligence. Reverence must be translated into work.
[Source: Harvard Salient]
On the face of it, it now seems like a guy who, like so many in the 60s came to college normal and ended up a far left revolutionary or a tool of the far left (we can call them communists).
I am prepared to believe this is what really happened, though I have lingering questions.
He was an online gamer, violent games, that also contributed.
“celebration when opponents are deplatformed, undone” – There is some of that on the Right, right now.
I don’t judge either way here, but plenty of leftists have said ugly things in the wake of Kirk’s assassination and, in the nameof consistent standards (albeit standards established largely by the Left), have been fired from jobs, etc. to the delight of some on the Right.