Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah
1140 comments
·September 10, 2025themgt
But we have to make an effort in the United States. We have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond, or go beyond these rather difficult times.
My favorite poem, my -- my favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote:
"Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God."
What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love, and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country ...
We can do well in this country. We will have difficult times. We've had difficult times in the past -- and we will have difficult times in the future. It is not the end of violence; it is not the end of lawlessness; and it's not the end of disorder.
But the vast majority of [people] in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our land.
And let's dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.
Bobby Kennedy, 1968
tmsh
The most sustainable vision wins. And this is a great vision. Thanks for posting. Helped clarify how to think about today.
null
csours
History books can tell you facts that happened, but they can never truly tell you how it feels.
I feel we're riding a knife's edge and there's a hurricane brewing in the gulf of absurdity.
====
Incidentally, I feel like this is why it is so hard to actually learn from history. You can read about the 1918 'Spanish' Flu, but you think "we're smarter now". etc.
nancyminusone
Something I like to remind myself of is that all past wars, even ones thousands of years ago, took place in as vibrant colors and fluid detail as we experience today, not in grainy black and white photos or paintings.
Also, if your grandpa likes telling war stories, it's only because he survived.
yibg
Probably more fluid details than today where someone can push a button and level a building 1000 miles away without seeing the faces of any of the people torn to shreds. Maybe there would be less appetite for war if people had to still physically hack up their enemies with a sword or axe.
mothballed
A lot of war stories get embellished and no one is going to challenge it.
There's the story about the guy who says he was the hardest working man in Vietnam, and then when pressed about what he did, he states he was a trucker to the great surprise of anyone listening.
When asked why he thought that, he says "well I was the only one."
RichardCA
If you're talking about the ones who drove supply trucks during the war years, the hardest working men were women.
https://vietnamnews.vn/sunday/features/947180/female-drivers...
lm28469
We've always been on a knife edge it's just streamed straight into your eyes balls 24/7 now and social media means everyone has to have a black or white opinion about everything.
tracker1
Men of Virginia! pause and ponder upon those instructive cyphers, and these incontestible facts. Ye will then judge for yourselves on the point of an American navy. Ye will judge without regard to the prattle of a president, the prattle of that strange compound of ignorance and ferocity, of deceit and weakness; without regard to that hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."
-- James Callender, The Prospect Before Us, 1800
dylan604
While that may be true to an extent, the 24/7 nature of it now is the equivalent of constantly red lining the engine. It used to be you'd go to meetings/gatherings of like minded people to get hopped up and your engines revved up like that, but they would for the most part cool back down after getting back home. Now, the engine never gets back to idle and stays red lined. At some point, the engine will break down, only instead of throwing a rod or ceasing up, something non-engine related will happen.
lm28469
From a personal point of view I agree, it's completely unhealthy, but from a global perspective it's always been fucked up all the time, open a wiki page for any year between 1900 and now and you will find loads of assassinations, terrorist attacks, wars, famine, genocides, coups d'états, &c.
poszlem
[flagged]
ttoinou
You can read about the 1918 'Spanish' Flu, but you think "we're smarter now". etc.
dylan604
I think COVID proved we're not smarter now in multiple ways and from either side. Human nature is a weird thing that we clearly are still grasping to understand
digdugdirk
"Either side"? The virus or humanity?
jimt1234
> History books can tell you facts that happened, but they can never truly tell you how it feels.
Great quote. I feel the same way about 9/11 - the feeling of confusion, like "wtf is going on?!" IMHO, only those who lived it can really relate.
pelagicAustral
Of all the days I've been alive, if I could pin point one that I remember vividly with every bit of detail and emotion, that'd be 9/11... I was 14, and all of the sudden, even that younger version of myself, understood every single thing was about to change...
nicce
I don't live in the U.S but I watched 9/11 live from the television, and I can still feel it and remember it. It was so big deal.
ngcazz
I really don't like how interesting these times are.
csours
I don't like that I'm starting to understand Magical Realism
null
tredeske
[dead]
ivape
Why do we think we’re passed an Arch Duke Ferdinand moment? Trump is more than ready to use his secret police.
RIP Charlie Kirk, no human deserves that. The rest of us left are still not necessarily better people after that exact moment, hopefully everyone takes a pause.
JacobThreeThree
Constantly fear-mongering that every event that occurs is a prelude to a repeat of history's worst atrocities is exactly the type of rhetoric we should avoid.
ivape
I agree with you.
Do you think we have a Presidency with the same sensibility? They sent the national guard with zero pretense all over the country. This is about to get serious.
ipython
I was just at a conference today where one of the presenters referenced the "Trust barometer": https://www.edelman.com/trust/2025/trust-barometer
According to that study, 23% approved of the statement "I approve hostile activism to drive change by threatening or committing violence". It's even higher if you only focus on 18-34 year olds.
Full report here: https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2025-0...
autoexec
"threatening or committing violence" could mean almost anything. It isn't hard to find evidence of people (especially young ones) equating speech with violence.
I imagine that "I support assassination to drive change" would be even less popular.
Lerc
It will be a range of opinions within that area, but even at the tail there are a concerning number of people.
One person in a thousand prepared to commit violence for political ends can be enough to turn a country into chaos.
zdragnar
Have we already forgotten the absurd amount of support the murderer of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare?
Maybe it wasn't 23%, but it was certainly not insignificant.
> It isn't hard to find evidence of people (especially young ones) equating speech with violence.
I don't think anyone conflates the phrase "threatening or committing violence" with "threatening or committing calling you a bad name". Yes, there's too much equating speech and violence, but the particular wording of threatening or committing imho is largely still reserved for the physical variety.
mothballed
Is it possible that violence is just more rational for today's 18-34 y/o than it was at some other points in recent history?
Lerc
The argument against using violence to achieve you ends is that if everyone does it, it is bad for everyone. If those who do it do not face repercussions then they will gain undue advantage, motivating everyone to match their actions, which again, is bad for everyone. The solution is the social contract and the rule of law. If enough people agree that anyone taking that path should face repercussions sufficient to not grant a net advantage, then enforcement of the law prevents others from taking the path of violence to reach parity with the violent
When the rule of law is eroded, which it has been, in the US and worldwide. Then it does indeed become more rational to use violence to restore the rule of law. Unfortunately it also increases the motivation towards violence for personal gain, that makes the task of restoring the rule of law all that more difficult. Countries have spent years trying to recover that stability once it is lost.
throwaway250624
[flagged]
tossandthrow
These studies are interest but should equally be interpreted as the desire for change - and I think it is reasonable to say that there is a huge desire for change.
In particular regard anti democratic developments, an increasing oligarchy, and increased inequality.
If I was a leader, I would take this really seriously and start to make some hard decisions.
jackmottatx
[flagged]
nickdothutton
Just the other day I was reading about the Italian "Years Of Lead" [1] which I wasn't old enough to understand myself at the time in the UK. I was wondering if we could see something similar as various forces internal and external strained at the seams of western democracies. For context, there is quite febrile atmosphere in the UK at the moment so I feel it is useful to attempt to calibrate these things for stochastic effects.
pacbard
Without knowing what happened, it's difficult to make the comparison between the Italian Years of Lead and what happened earlier today at Utah Valley University.
My understanding of the Italian political climate of the 60s, 70s, and 80s is that there were political groups/cells (on both the far right and far left) that organized around violent acts to further their political goals (which involved the eventual authoritarian takeover of the Italian government by either the far right or far left). For example, you can think of the Red Brigades to be akin to the Black Panthers, but with actual terrorism.
In contrast, most political violence in America has been less organized and more individual-driven (e.g., see the Oklahoma City Bombing). For better or worse, the police state in the US has been quite successful in addressing and dispersing political groups that advocate for violence as a viable means for societal change.
mrguyorama
Timothy McVeigh got his start watching Waco burn, hanging out with groups around the US "militia movement", and reading The Turner Diaries, and had like 3 accomplices.
He wasn't a "lone wolf".
PaulDavisThe1st
But he also wasn't actually acting as a part of anything like the Red Brigades either, so the GP's point still stands.
Zigurd
There's video of the police carrying someone away, with his pants down. They drop him on his face at one point. Apparently the wrong guy.
Utah has what they call "constitutional carry." Extremely permissive gun laws. I'd bet there were several people carrying concealed in that crowd, not counting security and police.
petsfed
Reports are that the single shot came from ~200 yards/meters away, which is basically the worst case scenario for good-guy-with-a-gun. In an active shooter situation, an armed bystander could in principle stop an attacker from continuing, but the only way that an armed bystander could hope to stop an assassination is if they were walking around looking for trouble.
Regardless of where you stand on the subject of concealed carry, I don't think its controversial to say we shouldn't be encouraging untrained/unvetted folks to go seek out would-be assassins before they have demonstrated themselves to be a danger. That's exactly how "armed security" shot and killed an actual bystander at the Salt Lake City 50501 demonstration earlier this year.
bigstrat2003
I bang on a lot about not saying things like "this person is a threat to democracy" and other such apocalyptic statements. This right here is a perfect example of why: when you steep people in a culture that tells them someone is (or their ideas are) an existential threat, eventually someone is going to be the right level of scared + unstable that causes them to kill people to try to defend their way of life.
If you find this horrifying (and I hope you do, because there can be no moral justification for celebrating murder), then I encourage you to really think about whether we would not be better off without such extremist language poisoning people's minds. We have to try to stop escalating, or the cycle is going to destroy our society.
kybernetikos
You start your comment saying we should avoid making apocalyptic statements and end it by saying "the cycle is going to destroy our society".
My conclusion is that you don't mind making apocalyptic statements about actions you think are dangerous to society, which sits uncomfortably with your asking other people not to.
roenxi
I'd say the appropriate read there is to slip the word "unjustified" into a few key slots. The view is nearly impossible to avoid in context. How do you see society surviving if the prevailing view is that anyone with a different belief is trying to bring on the end times? To the point where assassinating political opponents is justified?
It would bring on the end of a society. It might well happen in the US case, they've been heading in a pretty dangerous direction rhetorically. If we take the Soviet Union as a benchmark they probably have a long way to go but that sort of journey seems unnecessary and stupid.
null
Chris2048
It's not clear that "existential" threat and "destruction of society" are the same. A society can be "destroyed" via a lapse in the social contract, turning it into a "society" or a different nature, or a non social population.
yibg
I understand the thrust of your comment, but why is "this person is a threat to democracy" an apocalyptic statement, but "... or the cycle is going to destroy our society" not? Seems like you're being rather selective in what's considered apocalyptic statements and what's not.
There is no inherent thread of violence in saying "this person is a threat to democracy". This is why the US has strong protections for speech, so that we don't get arbitrary determinations of what's acceptable and what's not.
siliconc0w
It can be both simultaneously true that the current administration and its supporters are genuinely dangerous to our democracy and that political violence is not an acceptable way to effect social change.
Yes, it's true that lunatics on both sides may use their side's rhetoric as a call to action but often this isn't even the case and they're just hopelessly confused and mentally ill people. It'd be nice if we lived in a society where those people couldn't get guns or could get mental health treatment and it'd be nice if one side of this debate didn't weaponize these common sense ideas into identity politics but here we are.
Loughla
The othering that is so very common in online discussion is genuinely dangerous. It's incredibly common and almost benign at this point because it's just everywhere.
It is historically proven as the first step to violence. People seem to think that words don't matter.
They matter very much. Just because you can read millions of words a day, doesn't mean they're not powerful.
Support him or no, he didn't deserve to die for his political beliefs.
kybernetikos
Do we know if this violence is politically motivated yet? Of course it seems likely, but it also seems premature to jump to trying to use this as proof of a particular personal position.
I definitely believe that people should be more understanding of each other, and less quick to jump to insults and othering, but we know so little about this situation, to be so confident that it was caused by speech seems extreme.
I am also aware that a lot of the political violence of the last few years ended up not being motivated by the reasons one might naturally expect.
mvdtnz
Do we know if the assassination of Charlie Kirk is politically motivated? Are you being serious?
pjc50
> when you steep people in a culture that tells them someone is (or their ideas are) an existential threat, eventually someone is going to be the right level of scared + unstable that causes them to kill people to try to defend their way of life.
Well, yes. People point this out regularly with mass shootings. Sometimes the shooters helpfully leave a list of all the violent rhetoric that inspired them. Anders Breivik claimed to be acting against an "existential threat". Those words get used a lot.
breadwinner
Violence should not be how we settle our disagreements. But if someone is genuinely a threat to democracy we should be able to express that opinion. Fear that someone may act violently should not cause us to suppress our genuine fears about the future of our democracy.
NewJazz
What if it is true that someone is a threat to democracy?
AndrewDucker
What should people say when someone is advocating against democracy?
Molitor5901
This is nuts. I am deeply worried we are headed towards open armed conflict. The violence against political opponents must stop, no matter who it is.
quietmonkey
Yes, that is a distinct possibility. Let’s avoid it by restoring democracy, as many have been campaigning for.
hinkley
Democrats are slightly better at this than Republicans, but I find both parties exasperating with respect to: when you find a trick that lets you do something difficult that seems like many people don’t want done, the other side is taking notes. The next time power shifts they will now have a precedent to use the same tricks.
I’m worried that if this escalates we will have a new federal holiday for the next Martin Luther King Jr not so long from now.
Well you killed our guys so how can you be surprised we killed yours?
dyauspitr
Slightly is a massive understatement here.
NewJazz
The best prevention is deterrence.
osrec
Hate filled politics seems to dominate the world, and that often culminates in violence. The elite are using it as a tool to seize power. The US and Israel are freely spewing very divisive political rhetoric currently, and especially towards the least educated, while making them endure economic hardship. It will likely not result in peace.
I know they are worlds apart, but just look at what happened in Nepal...
Grollicus
> I know they are worlds apart, but just look at what happened in Nepal...
They let hotel inhabitants leave before burning it down. The finance minister got caught by the mob and survived. Does make it seem quite controlled, imo.
WastedCucumber
For those, like me, wondering what happened in Nepal:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45166972
edit: this too - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45184558
flyinglizard
I’m puzzled why you’re dragging Israel into this, especially given that the mere acknowledgment of Israel’s right to exist is, sadly, divisive and inflammatory.
pjc50
They assassinated some guys in Doha very recently.
cpursley
[flagged]
null
digitaLandscape
[flagged]
unnamed76ri
We are a society whose culture has become unmoored from the values that built it.
mcbobgorge
The Enlightenment directly led to violent revolutions in the US and France. Political violence has never not been a part of political society in some capacity. What is effective is not always what is right, and violence is often effective (not in this case, in my opinion).
nickthegreek
Have we? The culture and values that built this country are stained in blood, violence, and subjugation. I feel we are actually losing the enlightenment that came afterwards and regressing back.
maxerickson
Jamelle Bouie wrote a piece about this, published this morning.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/10/opinion/lincoln-schmitt-t...
unnamed76ri
The things you listed have always been with us, sure. What we’ve lost is the ability to see objective truth. And maybe people celebrated senseless killing in the past too and we just didn’t have access to their sick mentality before the internet.
sporkxrocket
Mobs of white people (including children) used to gather around the town square to hang black people. They would literally have picnics while doing it. I feel like the majority of our population is historically illiterate. On the scale of senseless killings, this doesn't even rank.
null
mcs5280
Values don't make stonks go up
vik0
Am I wrong in thinking this guy isn't/wasn't a very influential person, outside of Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7? If so, why even target the poor guy? What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit? Either way, I hope he makes it, even though it looks like it was a fatal blow
ceejayoz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_Point_USA
> TPUSA has been described as the fastest growing organization of campus chapters in America, and according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, is the dominant force in campus conservatism.
They've been quite influential, and those campus efforts likely contributed to the Gen Z turnout that helped win in 2024.
sbmthakur
I was doing Masters in the US from 2021-23 and do recall getting their emails to my University email.
aj7
[flagged]
umvi
I saw his videos occasionally on youtube/facebook. I didn't really agree with his stances on immigration most of the time, though I thought some of his other arguments on other topics were thought provoking at least, and I also thought it was cool that he always had an open mic for anyone that wanted to debate him. Seemed like he had an encyclopedic memory when it came to things like SCOTUS cases or historical events.
garbthetill
Im not american, but consume american media because you guys are the world leaders. But charlie had the number 1 youth conservative movement in the country , he is pretty influential
osrec
Pretty influential, and unfortunately also pretty controversial
vik0
I'm not American either
tripplyons
He was just made fun of on the new season on South Park, if you consider that to be influential.
aerostable_slug
I thought he took it in good sport. They didn't exactly hold back on him.
Given that and the fact that we're in the middle of a new South Park season, a show known for its last-minute incorporation of real-world news into storylines, it will be interesting to see how the show handles this tragic development.
louthy
As a non-American, non-Twitter user, this was how I heard about him.
nicce
At the moment he was shot, he was answering for questions about transgender shootings. If the timing was calculated, it could be a political message or very strong personal hatred in this context.
rented_mule
> What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit?
I think a difficulty in searching for such answers is assuming that it was a well reasoned decision. I'm not sure how often attempting to take a life is a purely rational decision, devoid of intense emotional motivations (hatred, self-preservation, fear, revenge, etc.). And that's all assuming the assailant was of somewhat sound mind.
I think one of the dangers of more and more extreme divisions in society is that those divisions cloud our mental processes, threaten our emotional health, and take away opportunities for meaningful civil discourse. All of which can lead to more heinous acts that we struggle to make sense of. One of the scariest parts for me is that this can all be too self reinforcing ("Their side did this bad thing to our side, let's get them back!!!" repeat/escalate...). How do we break the cycle?
hypeatei
He ran a very large conservative organization that operates on college campuses across the country. He's definitely an influential figure.
ramoz
He drew a massive college crowd and was shot at that event. That's your answer.
swader999
This is the worst kind of censorship. I guess debate is also dead.
faku812
"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."
null
poszlem
[flagged]
dang
Please stop using HN for ideological battle, especially in this thread.
You're far from the only account doing this, of course, but (perhaps due to randomness) I've noticed several places you've done it in this thread, in contradiction of both https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45203452 and https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
lexandstuff
No, this violence is from a deranged person who shouldn't have had access to a firearm in the first place. No culture wars please.
yahoozoo
Crazy how deranged people with firearms seem to shoot exclusively at people in the right wing politico politisphere lately.
bix6
[flagged]
mandeepj
Spent a few secs today searching on Kirk. Landed on Turning Point USA's [0] wiki page, that org he co-founded with Bill.
The following text is from Bill's wiki page [1], and it caught my eye -
He died of complications from COVID-19 on July 28, 2020, at age 80.[5] After his death, Turning Point USA deleted a tweet that mocked wearers of protective masks.
So, he has to die for his org to believe in COVID? Conservatives do have a problem! I'm not saying all of them are bad. They don't have to question everything, throw accusations, and name-calling at those who don't agree with them. Do they know more about vaccines, science, and technology than people who have spent at least 10 years in college studying them? especially vaccines and medicine in general.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_Point_USA [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Montgomery_(activist)
All: if you can't respond in a non-violent way, please don't post until you can.
By non-violent I mean neither celebrating violence nor excusing it, but also more than that: I mean metabolizing the violence you feel in yourself, until you no longer have a need to express it aggressively.
The feelings we all have about violence are strong and fully human and I'm not judging them. I believe it's our responsibility to each carry our own share of these feelings, rather than firing them at others, including in the petty forms that aggression takes on an internet forum.
If you don't share that belief, that's fine, but we do need you to follow the site guidelines when commenting here, and they certainly cover the above request. So if you're going to comment, please make sure you're familiar with and following them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.