This is exactly what I have been frustrated with this week. I usually watch MSNBC and have been baffled at journalists I normally admire suddenly glossing over Kirk’s platform of racism and misogyny to claim he was an “advocate for free speech” as well as lauding him for organizing the youth of America to be politically active. They failed to mention they were all white (probably racist)youth. I get that they didn’t want to vilify him after he’d been horrifically murdered, but to portray him as some sort of hero is a bridge too far. Kirk has said many odious things and didn’t really care about an exchange of ideas. His casket had a military pallbearer detail led by VP Vance and flown on Air Force Two (despite him never having been the military; he had applied for nomination to the Military Academy in West Point and was not accepted. He claimed the slot he believed should have been his instead went to “a far less-qualified candidate of a different gender and a different persuasion,” and claimed he knew that person’s test scores.)
they're afraid. An MSNBC analyst has been fired. The regime is openly threatening Americans who don't support -- or speak out against -- racism and christofascism (NOT actual Christianity).
Between the glazing of Kirk and the rubbing of elbows with (at best) white supremacist-adjacent people it's pretty clear Klein and many centrists have very little problem with the conservatives ideas that are harming millions and destroying the country.
Also find it disturbing that there's basically been no discourse on gun control. The media and Republicans have fallen over themselves trying to deify some hack pundit and not once have I seen anyone talk about the very obvious steps we could take to prevent gun violence. We're a very sick country and there are sadly very few people in power who have any interest in making us better.
Thank you so much for this. Klein and others are bending over backwards to avoid the finger pointing - very self defensive - and not very useful to the rest of us. I really appreciate the way you frame reality.
Thank you for bringing clarity to the complexity of our current moment. Contextualizing the Kirk killing within the phenomena of political violence in American culture is vastly more helpful than the non-stop jawboning of the hand-wringing commentariat. I have one quibble—let’s retire the word “assassination” w/r/t the Charlie Kirk murder. It’s a word that legitimates flags at “half mast” and contributes to the valorization of the rightwing agenda. Every time I hear “assassination” and “Charlie Kirk” in the same sentence, I flash back to Chris Rock’s old comedy bit about Tupac Shakur and Biggy Smalls.
Not sure what's happened to the king of false equivalence, loose-connection-to-reality and formerly? reputtable Ezra Klein, lately worst known as coauthor of the offensively bad "Abundance."
(A) Out of basic human decency and also for the benefit of the fascist surveillance state: yes, murdering Charlie Kirk was wrong and horrible and should never have happened.
And yet let's not forget (for example) the assassination of Democratic politician Melissa Hortman and her husband. And the fact that the vast majority of political violence in the US comes from the far right.*
(B) But in our era of fascist surveillance and masked secret police disappearing people off the streets, it takes real courage to publish God's actual truth.
(C) So please back up all your files overseas. The erasure and suppression of documentation of Kirk's actual speech has been swift.
Just 2 examples (a whole bunch of *recent* articles DuckDuckGo served up on 2025-09-10 were suspiciously 404).
Note URL date: story (served up by DuckDuckGo on 2025-09-10 was 404 same day:
On 2025-09-10 and still today (2025-09-12) the NBC URL links to
"With return of three pandas to China, U.S. could soon have none: The National Zoo’s beloved bears are set to leave this month, while the loan agreement for the country’s only other pandas, at Zoo Atlanta, is expiring next year."
(D) Wikipedia still has documentation up - we're regular donors, but for anyone here who can afford it, now would be a good time to contribute - https://wikimediafoundation.org/
"Scientific research has reported that right-wing ideologies are more prone to violence than left-wing ones.[11] A 2023 poll by PRRI reported that one out of four Americans supported political violence. In the study, one in three Republicans supported political violence, compared with 13% of Democrats and 22% of independents. The results represented an increased support for violence since PRRI began polling Americans on the topic in 2021.[12] Another 2024 PRRI survey reported that about 27% of Republicans and 32% of pro-Trump Republicans agreed that "patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country", compared with 1 in 6 Americans in general. For other groups, 8% of Democrats and 10% of independents supported the statement.[13]
[snip]
A 2024 University of California study of 13,000 gun owners reported that 42% of rifle owners said that violence could be justified in order to achieve a political goal. In total, 39% of gun owners and 30% of people who did not own any gun agreed.
[snip]
A study that examined the activities of 3,500 political extremists from 1948 to 2022 found that right-wing and Muslim extremists similarly likely to commit acts of political violence, while left-wing extremists were less likely to do so. University professor Gary LaFree stated in 2024 that right-wing violence was much more frequent than left-wing violence.[16]
Jasko K, LaFree G, Piazza J, Becker MH. A comparison of political violence by left-wing, right-wing, and Islamist extremists in the United States and the world. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 26;119(30):e2122593119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2122593119. Epub 2022 Jul 18. PMID: 35858413; PMCID: PMC9335287.
"In short, our individual-level examination found that among radicalized individuals in the United States, those adhering to a left-wing ideology were markedly less likely to engage in violent ideologically motivated acts when compared to right-wing individuals. By contrast, we found no such difference between Islamist and right-wing individuals. Reanalyzing the data with left-wing individuals being a reference category showed that the difference between Islamist and left-wing individuals was also significant (SI Appendix)."
This is exactly what I have been frustrated with this week. I usually watch MSNBC and have been baffled at journalists I normally admire suddenly glossing over Kirk’s platform of racism and misogyny to claim he was an “advocate for free speech” as well as lauding him for organizing the youth of America to be politically active. They failed to mention they were all white (probably racist)youth. I get that they didn’t want to vilify him after he’d been horrifically murdered, but to portray him as some sort of hero is a bridge too far. Kirk has said many odious things and didn’t really care about an exchange of ideas. His casket had a military pallbearer detail led by VP Vance and flown on Air Force Two (despite him never having been the military; he had applied for nomination to the Military Academy in West Point and was not accepted. He claimed the slot he believed should have been his instead went to “a far less-qualified candidate of a different gender and a different persuasion,” and claimed he knew that person’s test scores.)
Thank you for the great article.
they're afraid. An MSNBC analyst has been fired. The regime is openly threatening Americans who don't support -- or speak out against -- racism and christofascism (NOT actual Christianity).
Between the glazing of Kirk and the rubbing of elbows with (at best) white supremacist-adjacent people it's pretty clear Klein and many centrists have very little problem with the conservatives ideas that are harming millions and destroying the country.
Also find it disturbing that there's basically been no discourse on gun control. The media and Republicans have fallen over themselves trying to deify some hack pundit and not once have I seen anyone talk about the very obvious steps we could take to prevent gun violence. We're a very sick country and there are sadly very few people in power who have any interest in making us better.
Thank you so much for this. Klein and others are bending over backwards to avoid the finger pointing - very self defensive - and not very useful to the rest of us. I really appreciate the way you frame reality.
Thank you for bringing clarity to the complexity of our current moment. Contextualizing the Kirk killing within the phenomena of political violence in American culture is vastly more helpful than the non-stop jawboning of the hand-wringing commentariat. I have one quibble—let’s retire the word “assassination” w/r/t the Charlie Kirk murder. It’s a word that legitimates flags at “half mast” and contributes to the valorization of the rightwing agenda. Every time I hear “assassination” and “Charlie Kirk” in the same sentence, I flash back to Chris Rock’s old comedy bit about Tupac Shakur and Biggy Smalls.
Here’s Chris Rock: https://youtube.com/shorts/PO9yyS367p4?si=Y_zuDOEjFmXuMZaF
Yes. This.
Not sure what's happened to the king of false equivalence, loose-connection-to-reality and formerly? reputtable Ezra Klein, lately worst known as coauthor of the offensively bad "Abundance."
(A) Out of basic human decency and also for the benefit of the fascist surveillance state: yes, murdering Charlie Kirk was wrong and horrible and should never have happened.
And yet let's not forget (for example) the assassination of Democratic politician Melissa Hortman and her husband. And the fact that the vast majority of political violence in the US comes from the far right.*
(B) But in our era of fascist surveillance and masked secret police disappearing people off the streets, it takes real courage to publish God's actual truth.
(C) So please back up all your files overseas. The erasure and suppression of documentation of Kirk's actual speech has been swift.
Just 2 examples (a whole bunch of *recent* articles DuckDuckGo served up on 2025-09-10 were suspiciously 404).
Note URL date: story (served up by DuckDuckGo on 2025-09-10 was 404 same day:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/09/10/charlie-kirk-controversial-statements/
+++
NBC News: Live updates: Charlie Kirk is assassinated at Utah campus event; shooter at-large - This article discusses the circumstances of Kirk's death and includes reactions that highlight concerns about political violence and the state of free speech in America. - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/live-updates-charlie-kirk-shot-dead-utah-campus-event-rcna123456
On 2025-09-10 and still today (2025-09-12) the NBC URL links to
"With return of three pandas to China, U.S. could soon have none: The National Zoo’s beloved bears are set to leave this month, while the loan agreement for the country’s only other pandas, at Zoo Atlanta, is expiring next year."
(D) Wikipedia still has documentation up - we're regular donors, but for anyone here who can afford it, now would be a good time to contribute - https://wikimediafoundation.org/
+++++
* On political violence in the US:
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/whats_driving_political_violence_in_america
See graphic:
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/images/uploads/political_violence_graph.jpeg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_violence_in_the_United_States
"Scientific research has reported that right-wing ideologies are more prone to violence than left-wing ones.[11] A 2023 poll by PRRI reported that one out of four Americans supported political violence. In the study, one in three Republicans supported political violence, compared with 13% of Democrats and 22% of independents. The results represented an increased support for violence since PRRI began polling Americans on the topic in 2021.[12] Another 2024 PRRI survey reported that about 27% of Republicans and 32% of pro-Trump Republicans agreed that "patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country", compared with 1 in 6 Americans in general. For other groups, 8% of Democrats and 10% of independents supported the statement.[13]
[snip]
A 2024 University of California study of 13,000 gun owners reported that 42% of rifle owners said that violence could be justified in order to achieve a political goal. In total, 39% of gun owners and 30% of people who did not own any gun agreed.
[snip]
A study that examined the activities of 3,500 political extremists from 1948 to 2022 found that right-wing and Muslim extremists similarly likely to commit acts of political violence, while left-wing extremists were less likely to do so. University professor Gary LaFree stated in 2024 that right-wing violence was much more frequent than left-wing violence.[16]
Jasko K, LaFree G, Piazza J, Becker MH. A comparison of political violence by left-wing, right-wing, and Islamist extremists in the United States and the world. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Jul 26;119(30):e2122593119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2122593119. Epub 2022 Jul 18. PMID: 35858413; PMCID: PMC9335287.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9335287/
"In short, our individual-level examination found that among radicalized individuals in the United States, those adhering to a left-wing ideology were markedly less likely to engage in violent ideologically motivated acts when compared to right-wing individuals. By contrast, we found no such difference between Islamist and right-wing individuals. Reanalyzing the data with left-wing individuals being a reference category showed that the difference between Islamist and left-wing individuals was also significant (SI Appendix)."