Imbalance
I’m seeing a lot of grief and anguish for Charlie Kirk on the left.
You know what I didn’t see? The same kind or amount of grief and anguish for Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark, not on the right and not even on the left.
Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband were killed, and state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife were wounded in politically motivated shootings early Saturday, Gov. Tim Walz said. Authorities have also identified a suspect who is still at large.
Why the difference?
My reading of the situation is that many people on the left care about the abstract principle that political violence is wrong, regardless of the target, and wish to be seen abiding by that principle. I don’t think most people on the right feel the same kind of obligation to be seen abiding by that principle, and may not actually care about it, except as a cudgel to use against opponents.
Perhaps I’m cynical, but the great outpouring of grief on the left strikes me as part performative and part fear that Trump and his faction will use the murder as an excuse for some kind of crackdown.
I have seen that some people on the interwebs have been positively gleeful about the murder, and are collecting suggestions for who should be next, among them Musk, Rowling, and Netanyahu.
The Hoffmans’ murders wasn’t caught on tape. But beyond that —
Many on the left have been, as Sackbut put it, “positively gleeful.” Others have taken the “I don’t condone murder, but he was EVIL” tack. The same thing happened in response to the assassination of Brian Thompson.
And Kirk actually made a point of talking with his political enemies. https://youtu.be/FhzqKQzueKU?si=rIJbBoGZ0H5goWC9
I don’t feel personal anguish over his death; I wasn’t familiar with him and he was barely on my radar. But I am distressed by some of the reactions–and there are more than a few – from those on the “be kind” side, and what it says about the state of political discourse in this country.
Sackbut #1:
I think you are right, and that many people on the left, while not pacifists, would follow the principle that violence is something to be avoided as much as possible. Hence the public condemnations of Kirk’s murder.
There would also be the principle that the regular appearance of violence in politics is inherently destabilizing. I am reminded of something Leonard Woolf wrote in 1936 :
It would seem that violence is becoming the “primary instrument” of US society again.
As someone who knows people on the same list of targets as the Hortmans and the Hoffmans, I do find this dispiriting, and the national government response of a half-mast flag at the Federal Buildings is a reminder of the lack of concern that the President had, choosing to golf rather than attend the funeral or even to visit when Melissa Hortman was lying in state, to be a reminder that the government is in the hands of people whose grief is dependent on the dead’s political persuasion. The RW conspiracy mongers who claimed that the murders were a result of Hortman voting for a budget deal that Republicans also voted for, and the governor ordered a “hit” on her, have never apologized or acknowledged that the murderer was a right wing crusader who had decided to be a John Brown.
And while there were a number of lefties who celebrated the death of Kirk, it’s a reminder that there are assholes everywhere and it’s not dependent on what your political views are. I have seen a whole bunch of righties declare that this sample is proof that the left are terrorists who want to kill people for their political views.
He did not espouse “Free Speech,” he espoused “Me Speech,” as Thomas Zimmer notes in this article:
https://open.substack.com/pub/thomaszimmer/p/the-right-wants-a-reichstag-fire
And there is this undeniable set of observations by Zimmer:
They really do consider us to be traitors, and while the Democrats do have this inexplicable devotion to trans ideology, there is nothing on the scale of hatred towards us that can be considered an equivalent from the Democrats. A government that honors Ashli Babbit and gives her family $5 million for wrongful death is not the friend of freedom nor liberty, and Kirk was a driver of that ideology. We are talking about someone who wanted single-party rule, not free speech.
Shortly after I posted this, I went to review my business TikTok account and plan my posts for the day. As much as I attempt to keep my feed focused on business and people who would be interested in what I do for them, political posts intrude and I don’t know how to tell TikTok I don’t want to engage there (just as I am trying to disengage from politics on other social media, I still am seeing posts from people such as “josephbarlish” that read “Democrats are not Americans anymore!!”)
I turned on a family Whatsapp group last night. And suddenly, I saw three of my relatives, who are religious RCs but who’ve never spoken about politics there before, saying what a tragedy Kirk’s death was and what a good “Christian patriot” and family man he was. And when one younger relative gently pointed out that she did not agree with Kirk’s political views, she got harangued by the others.
It was upsetting, especially as we’d only previous used the WA to share holiday photos and old pop songs.
Perhaps I’m too cynical, but it seems to me the big difference is that Charlie Kirk’s death went viral on social media. I would suppose that Hortman, Hoffman and their respective spouses were not controversial enough to garner the kind of attention that drove so many prominent left-wing figures to decry Kirk’s death. Gun violence is so normalized in the United States that it takes a lot of prominence for a victim not to be immediately forgotten.
It’s really not that complicated. Charlie had a huge presence in politics, social media and media in general. He was roasted in South Park, ffs.
It’s scompletely predictable and understandable.
No, I don’t think that’s cynical, it’s just reality. Kirk was shot on camera, and Hortman wasn’t. Yes that does make a difference. It’s just how human cognition works.
Guardian reports Utah Governor as saying as the authorities have arrested a Tyler Robinson as prime suspect in Charlie Kirk shooting.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/sep/12/charlie-kirk-shooter-suspect-latest-news-updates-donald-trump-utah#top-of-blog
Uh, oh, the Trump Administration has warned immigrants not to be “making light” of Charlie Kirk’s murder:
https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-admin-eyeing-revoking-legal-status-of-immigrants-making-light-of-charlie-kirk-killing/
It says “”Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred” are not welcome in the country”.
Wonder does that list of “foreigners” include Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu and Narendra Modi ?
Teachers are being fired or disciplined for expressing their opinions:
https://www.google.com/search?q=teachers+fired+for+posting+about+charlie+kirk&oq=teachers+fired+for+posting+about+charlie+kirk&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRigATIHCAYQIRiPAtIBCTEzMzI2ajBqN6gCCLACAfEFwQ_t8hW5Yoc&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Nullius in Verba #8
Geography also plays a role – I live about 1800 miles from Minnesota. If I wanted to drive there, it would be 27-28 hours of just driving (stops and rest would make it a two-day trip). Many of us in the USA had never heard of the murdered people in Minnesota before the coward gunned them down. Many people here saw it as a “local” crime issue for that state that did not have much to do with the nation as a whole. Which was probably a dim way to look at it, but we tend to focus on what is going on closer to us most of the time.
[…] a comment by Mike Haubrich on […]
For politicians anymore, and to a lesser extent A-list celebrities, potential violence comes with the territory anymore; on a subconscious level, we’re all aware of this. Kirk started out as a guy with a microphone talking to people on campus and wanting to debate them. Theoretically, any one of us could do the same.
So any one of us could die the same way.
I’ve heard and seen very little unequivocal condemnation of Kirk’s assassination, outside of politicians and political commentators. Instead, I’ve seen a lot of outright glee, and a lot of “Political violence is bad, but…” from ordinary people.
No. Stop. To quote Game of Thrones “Everything you said before ‘but’ is bullshit.”
Either you believe political violence is wrong, or you don’t. It doesn’t matter the beliefs or the speech. There is no grey area. There are no acceptable targets.
To see so many people — particularly teachers — unable or unwilling to comprehend why Kirk’s assassination is a danger to our democracy is worrisome. I miss the days when only the right-wing nutjobs believed in “Second Amendment solutions.”