Belated Thoughts on Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk by Gage Skidmore, Flickr.com

When Charlie Kirk was murdered last October, I was in the midst of putting my life back together after 16 months of unjust incarceration (having been targeted by Joe Biden’s DOJ for participating in an anti-abortion “rescue”) followed by 6 months spent caring for my terminally ill mother.  So there was no time for me to opine on Kirk’s life, his death, his influence on the abortion debate or what these things meant to me.  Perhaps that was for the best.  Immediately following the assassination, too many people were far too quick to open their mouths, either to heap unbounded praise on the man or heartlessly dance upon his grave.  To me, the former seemed like excessive hero-worship while the latter was both vile and disgusting.  But in such a climate anything I would have said might have been either misunderstood or ignored.  And anyway, the man’s death was too fresh.  So maybe it was good that I never had a chance to add my voice to the mix.  Now, 6 months since Kirk’s untimely demise, the attention and passions of the nation has inevitably moved on.  This seems an appropriate time to share my thoughts.  

My opinion of Charlie Kirk’s legacy is mixed.  I agreed with him on most issues and cannot deny the uplifting influence he and his organization, Turning Point USA, had on many people, especially young conservatives.  He was able to articulate his views powerfully and intelligently, something most people either never learn to do or lack the courage to put into practice.  He is credited with electing the president who released me from prison.  If the state of his heart reflected his confession of faith, he now rejoices in paradise amongst the angels. 

But for a long time I considered Kirk just one more of the many alt-right celebrities who soared to the top of the national conversation in the wake of Donald Trump’s first election victory in 2016.  I’ve always had a dim view of “professional” social commentators who build personal empires by aligning themselves with political movements and echoing opinions a certain segment of the population wants to hear.  It’s not that popularity is bad in and of itself.  It’s that the common person often assumes he or she need not get personally involved since such media personalities will save the world on our behalf.  And of course, in order to remain popular and relevant, Kirk had to treat abortion as only one problem among many plaguing America.  Topics like immigration, transgenderism, election fraud, race-baiting and above all left-wing violence are what really excites and enrages the conservative public.  Speaking out against that stuff generates more clicks.  By contrast abortion is … old news.  A commentator focusing solely on abortion will have a much harder time gaining the attention and accolades of the conservative public.

I admit that my assessment may be tainted by jealousy.  This is embarrassing to confess, but it’s true.  After 2 decades of diligent, quiet anti-abortion activism, hundreds of conversations with pro-abortion individuals, hundreds of hours of creating online content and numerous occasions when my safety was threatened, I and others like me are still nobodies while Charlie Kirk has received the Presidential Medal of Freedom and been lauded as the world’s greatest defender of Christian values.  This is frustrating to say the least, and it might make me more inclined to criticism.

Yet I had the same concerns back when I started in 2004, long before I’d heard of Turning Point USA.  I view them as the perennial paradoxes of the anti-abortion movement.  Ending abortion is more important than any other problem, yet focusing on other problems is the only way to gain a sufficiently large audience.  We cannot win without the regular participation of millions of unpaid volunteers, yet the people with platforms capable of reaching those potential volunteers will not push them too hard for fear of alienating everybody! 

As his advocacy matured, Charlie Kirk began to host events where he would take questions from leftist college students and give concise and persuasive answers.  Some of the questions were about abortion and he usually gave a solid pro-life response.  These interactions were then shared on social media and I’m sure that they were viewed by millions of people.  In my opinion, his campus Q and A sessions were the best thing Charlie ever did.  

But is this the secret to changing the hearts and minds of a generation?  Do we just need to amplify the voices of a few high-profile superheroes?  So far as I can tell, despite all its resources Turning Point USA was only able to host about a dozen of these public campus debates per year.  By contrast, during the height of my activism I visited one college and one high school every week during the school year.  I have always believed that nothing can replace the power of an intimate conversation between individuals.  This is why I encourage pro-lifers to spend time going out in their communities and engaging their neighbors directly.  

Yet only rarely do my activities attract massive crowds.  As is typical with abortion-related content, videos of my interactions receive only a tepid response online.  So I can understand why the Turning Point model seems more promising to a lot of people.  

At Charlie Kirk’s memorial service a short time after his death, many people promised to carry on the fight in his stead.  I think we’ve yet to see what exactly that entails.  One thing is certain: we have no time to waste.  Every day more preborn murders are committed, and these are lives that cannot be recovered.  If there is a way to defeat this savagery, we need to figure it out and not allow either fear, laziness or jealousy to cloud our judgement.  If Kirk’s story teaches us anything, it’s that we never know how much time we have.  So we’d better make our lives count.