Charlie Kirk assassination underscores rejection of civil debate

“The best lacks all condemnation, while the worst is full of emotional intensity.”

William Bertler wrote these words about Europe after the Great War, but they are terrible this week and we are buried Charlie Kirk, was killed on 31 For the crime of controversy in public places. The young man who built the discourse built from a garage in the suburbs was silenced by a person who apparently found more persuasive bullets than words.

But here is what amaze me as I am thinking about this tragedy: Charlie Kerk may have been the last American I think you could change the mind of someone with a good argument. Think about that. When was the last time you saw someone switching situations during the discussion? When did you see the last person saying that three of the most dear words in the English language: “You were wrong?”

The “Fear” tour takes the task of freedom of expression in Charlie Kerk to colleges worldwide

My younger son understood this belief. He called me after Kerk’s death and shared something that may have acquired our national origin. He said: “My father, I used to be like Charlie Kirk – I used to think that people can be persuaded by the mind.”

My son learned otherwise during the 2016 elections, while he was at the Graduate School. He began to get several calls daily from classmates who wanted to understand how someone could really support his belief that he is equivalent to the modern era of Hitler. Graduate students – educated and smart people who follow the Master of Business Administration – believe in Embiti that Trump was equally with Hitler and they were calling my son because they were unable to reconcile how a person like him could support this evil.

Therefore, in good faith, he shared everyone who called him. From his own account: “I came to the College of Business Administration to learn things like accounting, and not to practice defending myself from calling Nazism. I lost my friends during this period, and it was ended with being one of the most difficult times of my life.”

Let me present an unconventional thesis: Charlie Kirk died because we forgot how to hate correctly. Gk Chesteton note that “the real soldier does not fight because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves beyond [or next to] “We are not fighting for the hatred of our enemies, but the love of our soldiers and like our country. We have been reasonable.

When my son lost my friends, he did something completely understandable. Soon after Trump’s election, he stopped participating actively in politics – Share the news, talk about it with friends, and read the articles that he used to read daily. He told me: “I found myself feeling uncomfortable when the news appeared.” “Defending yourself against the so -called Nazi, racist, sexual bias, not only to communicate with relatively sound ideas like boys go to the boys and girls bathroom go to the girls’ bath, or that throwing Molotov cocktails in police cars is a bad idea (something his colleague actually did during the George Floyd protests) only drains after a while. “

Charlie Kirk (L) and his wife, Erika Lin Franzvz, during the opening game Turning Point Usa at the Salmanand Hotel on January 19, 2025 in Washington, DC (Samuel Corome/Getty Emose)

My son has learned a difficult and unfortunate lesson during the graduate school, and one of the other students who are endless in recent years has learned. The modern university, where Kirk met its end, was the opposite of what John Henry Newman imagined when he wrote “The idea of ​​the university.” Neumman imagines institutions where “the mind that lasts through life is usually formed, which is the characteristics of freedom, equation, calm, moderation, and wisdom.” Instead, we have created fragile factories, as students pay $ 70,000 annually to confirm their biases and avoid their operators.

The founders had immediately recognized Charlie. Franklin with JUNTO, Hamilton with his newspapers, Jefferson with his correspondence, they all understood that democracy is an argument, not an answer. Madison wrote at Federist 10 about the dangers of the faction, but he never imagined that we will solve the problem of the faction by assassination.

Here is another unconventional idea: the problem is not that our universities are very political. They are not politicians in the classic sense of the “politician” that Aristotle intended when he described man as a political animal. The university problem is that it is the factory for indoctrination, especially in liberal arts. The real policy requires participation with the difference, the ability to live alongside those who do not agree with them, and the skill of persuasion instead of coercion. We deprived us of the policy of theology, and the tolerant is not tolerant in this.

We have made the cost of condemnation so high that those who are able to begin with beginners are completely retreating from public participation.

My son concluded his reflection with the words chasing me: “In those moments, after he took the wrong choice in this turn several times before, I hope I have a conviction and courage to live like Charlie and live it like Bill.” Charlie Kirk meant, of course. The other draft law that his father referred to – me. I am modest of comparison, but it is upset with his confession. While it was Muslim to threw his hat outside the ring, and entered the non -political world for financing, he found his comfort and happiness. But at what cost to our community?

This is what we did to our youth. We have made the cost of condemnation so high that those who are able to begin with beginners are completely retreating from public participation. We have created a world in which we are more secure to be silent, safer to compatible with skepticism, and safer to hide than standing. There is some relief in it. But it does not come without cost.

Click here for more Fox News

The question in front of us is not if we have more Charlie Kirx – people ready to courageously for their beliefs. we will. The question is whether we have more like my son – the formable people who retract public participation because the cost has become very high. Few of the brightest people I know dream of entering politics – they dream of investment capital, private shares, and places where talents are still flourishing without ideological inspection courts. It is logical: earning enough money, and you may be able to influence the change you want to see in society, is securely isolated from mob.

If we cannot make America safe for the argument again – not just a civil argument, but a strong, emotional and even angry argument – we must stop pretending to live in democracy. In the sense of its literal origin, democracy means “the power of people” – it is permanently similar to the power of those affected. If you are not angry, you are at home to raise your family and go to work. So radical political movements naturally attract the most bending between us, and not necessarily the wise.

Charlie Kirk died at the age of 31, but the idea it represents – that the Americans can argue on their way to the truth instead of shooting their path to silence – he does not die with him. My son’s generation deserves better than choosing between silence and death. They deserve what Charlie Kirk tried to give them: a place on the table, voted in the conversation, and the right to speak without killing him. Our children and grandchildren deserve it.

Click here for more William J. Bennett