The tragic slaying of Charlie Kirk leaves a wife and two children bereft, along with other family members and a wide circle of friends and admirers. The immediate assumption was that someone on the political left was responsible. It appears now that that is not the case. In any case, we have yet another instance of political violence and another unstable young man with a gun leaving tragedy and trauma in his wake. Will this incident only lead to further division, or might it also become a turning point? Here are three hopeful responses, beginning with Utah Governor Spencer Cox:
In an emotional speech, appealing especially to young people, Cox said, “This is our moment. Do we escalate or do we find an off-ramp.” Cox who has been a long and impassioned advocate for bipartisanship and respectful debate, continued, “It is an attack on all of us, it is an attack on the American experiment, an attack on our ideals. Social media is a cancer, and I would urge people to log off, turn off, and touch the grass.” Instead, he said, “We get to make decisions. We have agency, and I desperately call on every American, Republican, Democrat, liberal, progressive, conservative, MAGA, all of us to please, please, please, follow what Charlie taught me” about free expression, forgiveness and human connection.
Then, on the PBS Newshour, commentator and author David Brooks spoke about the profound reaction of conservative friends of his. He spoke about the young men who resort to such violence, who feel they have nothing to lose. He continued then, “we all need to be motivated by something. In good leaders we’re motivated by what you might call the bright passions, hope, aspiration, a vision of a better life. People have discovered that it’s more powerful to motivate people with the dark passions, like anger, hatred, resentment, and the urge to dominate. And this has been true of politicians in both parties. The thing about the dark passions is they’re imperialistic. They’re like a cancer. Once they get in you and in the body politic, they tend to spread and it’s super hard to turn that around.” Later in the interview, concerning the reactions to this, Brooks said, “On the whole, a lot of people in various political stripes who really disagree with Charlie Kirk have been pretty noble about this. In seeing past politics. In seeing into a human life. Into a Christian, into a family man. Like in just seeing this a boat we’re all in. I’ve seen that across the political divide. And when I’ve looked at the Republican reaction, the overwhelming majority has been you know he was talking to people. He was talking to people he disagreed with. And that’s instructive to us. There’s a moment …Fear can sometimes be used for good. When you become so afraid that your society is slipping into chaos, then you’re jolted out of your bad habits. There has to be a moment of interruption. Where you say No, I’m stopping this. I’m not partaking. I will respond to hatred with love. I don’t know if this will be a turning point when people will make the interruption and halt the cycle, but so far, I’ve felt it’s been a moment, with a few exceptions, of coming together.”
And finally, in the wake of Kirk’s killing, young democrats and young republicans around the country are joining together in issuing joint statements condemning political violence. One of the first was from Rhode Island leaders, “We may disagree on policy, but we are united in our belief in the value of life, civil discourse, and mutual respect.” They pledged themselves to “political nonviolence,” and said, “when our dialogue becomes toxic it has unimaginable consequences.” And this then from the National Governor’s Association: “As Governors, we stand together—Republicans and Democrats-in condemning political violence in ever form. The incident today in Utah involving Charlie Kirk is a stark reminder that violence has no place in our democracy, in our states, or in our communities. Disagreements must be addressed through dialogue, debate, and the democratic process; not through intimidation or harm.”
Echoing St. Paul, Christian theologian Jon Sobrino said, “Hoping against hope is a third approach that arises from the resurrection of the crucified one.” May the voices and sentiments above, and the hope expressed here, spread and take root among us.
Steve Bullington
Adrian
