Charlie Kirk and wife Erika, speaking together at an event in Texas in 2025. (Photo: Gage Skidmore, at the 2025 Young Women's Leadership Summit at the Gaylord Texan Resort & Convention Center in Grapevine, Texas)
From This Tragedy, More Voices Must Rise
Silencing one voice cannot end the conversation. It must awaken a chorus of many
By Hector Barajas, September 15, 2025 2:45 am
Charlie Kirk’s death on September 10 was more than a personal tragedy; it struck at the very heart of free speech in America. For years, he had become a modern symbol of debate culture, a figure willing to put himself in front of hostile audiences and say, “Let’s talk.”
In a time when disagreement often leads to shouting, shaming, or silencing, Kirk chose dialogue — once so common it wasn’t even considered special in America, but now it seems like a lost art.
Kirk built his career not by hiding from critics but by meeting them head-on. In person, not from the safety of an online echo chamber. On college campuses across the country, he welcomed tough questions from students who often opposed everything he represented. He listened, he argued, and he stood his ground with facts, critical thinking, and a depth of knowledge rare for any citizen, especially someone his age.
It was not about demanding agreement but about proving that open dialogue matters more than uniformity of thought. He even sat with California Governor Gavin Newsom; while the two disagreed on most issues, they still managed to show millions of viewers what respectful debate could look like.
That choice to engage with opponents was no small act. In today’s culture, it is easier to cancel, shame, or attack than to have a real conversation. Too many people treat disagreement as something to shut down and silence. Kirk refused to play that game. He believed the only way to sharpen your own argument was to test it against the strongest case from the other side. In that way, he upheld the older American tradition of free speech, where ideas meet head-on and the best argument stands.
His assassination is therefore not only the silencing of one man, but also an assault on the heart and soul of America. When violence is used to end debate, free speech itself becomes the casualty. We cannot accept a future where the price of speaking out is fear for your life.
There is also a broader warning in this tragedy. Political violence doesn’t stop with one person. Once it becomes acceptable to kill or threaten a voice because you disagree with it, the door opens to silence anyone.
Today it was Charlie Kirk. Tomorrow it could be an elected official, a professor, a journalist, a union organizer, or a student. Free speech is not a partisan value. It is the foundation of democracy, and without it, every other right grows weaker.
Charlie Kirk forced people to think, respond, and defend their beliefs. He showed that disagreement doesn’t have to lead to dehumanization. He showed that you can argue passionately and still see the humanity in the person you’re debating.
Perhaps even more troubling than the cancer consuming the art of civil discourse is that Charlie Kirk’s underlying message was essentially one of love and respect for our country, our fellow citizens, our values, our history, and our future generations.
There is a poignant video clip circulating online of George Carlin, the sardonic comedian and social critic, who framed assassination this way:
“It’s interesting to notice who it is we assassinate. You know who it is — it’s always people who told us to live together in harmony and try to love one another. Jesus. Gandhi. Lincoln. John Kennedy. Bobby Kennedy. Martin Luther King. Medgar Evers. Malcolm X. John Lennon. They all said try to live together peacefully . . . .”
Sadly, we’ve experienced too many of these tragic moments in American life. Kirk’s assassination is yet another.
But like other moments in history, this tragedy can be a turning point. The best way to honor Kirk’s legacy is to refuse silence. We must keep speaking, listening, and debating, even when it is uncomfortable. Fear cannot be allowed to dictate our voices. The future of free speech, and the restoration of respect and love for this nation and for our fellow countrymen, depends on it.
- California’s Poverty Machine Manages Misery Instead of Solving It - October 31, 2025
- The Forgotten Victims in the Immigration Debate - October 27, 2025
- MacArthur Park Exposes California’s Failed Compassion - October 20, 2025
RELATED ARTICLES
-
-
July 11, 2022 -
July 16, 2019
This is a good post and I honestly take no issue with it, but I would point out that violence used towards political ends is hardly a new issue (JFK, RFK, Lincoln, and on and on).
Here’s a plug for a good book on the subject, which I will link to:
“In Day of the Assassins, acclaimed historian Michael Burleigh examines assassination as a special category of political violence and asks whether, like a contagious disease, it can be catching. Focusing chiefly on the last century and a half, Burleigh takes readers from Europe, Russia, Israel and the United States to the Congo, India, Iran, Laos, Rwanda, South Africa and Vietnam. And, as we travel, we revisit notable assassinations, among them Leon Trotsky, Hendrik Verwoerd, Juvénal Habyarimana, Indira Gandhi, Yitzhak Rabin and Jamal Khashoggi. Combining human drama, questions of political morality and the sheer randomness of events, Day of the Assassins is a riveting insight into the politics of violence.”
Thank you, Robert, for the comment and book recommendation.
So Robert/Roberta or whatever your real name or gender is, this posting is a real departure from your usual infantile postings fantasizing about President Trump’s demise. This posting sounds suspiciously like it was AI generated or lifted from somewhere else?
I was quoting a description of the book – that’s why I used quote marks!
Sorry “Robert” – there is ZERO tolerance for “political violence ” in American politics…
Be better than that….
But if you can’t, then you will awaken the sleeping giant…. a line was crossed this time….
Why don’t you read the book and learn something about human history and human nature?
From schoolyard bullies to boxing to the death penalty to assassination to all out war, humans have always used violence to get what they (think) they want.
Will the human race evolve away from violence for good, or will we exterminate ourselves well before we make the planet unihabitable?
Who knows? All of us will be long gone before that happens.
Take it easy @Robert G. Martinengo. @CriticalDfence9 was not attacking YOU personally…..just the idea, that you seem to accept, that political violence is inherent in human nature and is immutable; which is a simplistic explanation at best. We, on the other hand, believe that humans can make choices for either good or evil….Freedom offers that ability. Jesus was a victim of political violence, was he not? Perhaps if you though a little more deeply about these issues you might find some common ground with the people on this forum.
Thanks @Raymond (although you can’t actually @ people here). My point was that the awful thing that happened to Mr. Kirk is not going to change anything. Humans will keep doing violence to other humans and justifying it one way or another. I gotta say, history would strongly suggest that ‘organized religion’ is not a hindrance to violence – quite the opposite. But that’s a debate for another forum.
Robert/Roberta (or whatever it’s real name or gender is) has fantasized about President Trump’s early demise numerous times in previous posts and recommends a book on political assassins flippantly claiming that humans will keep doing violence to other humans. Clearly this is someone who is severely mentally ill and whom the Secret Service and law enforcement needs to closely monitor.
Yes, @CriticalDfence9. Our leftist “Robert” seems to have conflated the acts of “political violence” with the idea of original sin or “human nature” as he calls it. He apparently learned this by reading a history book and I am sure that it made the author happy. What set Charlie apart from people like “Robert” is that he not only read (the Bible) but he attempted to put what he learned and believed into action – creating Turning Point, USA. He was not one to say, “Well, that’s just the way it is and nothing we can do will change it.” Charlie Kirk will be remembered on the same level as Martin Luther King, Jr.. We ALL deserve to be where we are in life through the choices we made in the past. If we want something better in the future, each of we need to make different choices.
Believe it or not Raymond, I have actually read *more than one book*
What’s ironic about your comment: “Charlie Kirk will be remembered on the same level as Martin Luther King, Jr..” is that Mr. Kirk seems to have made some negative remarks about Dr. King :
Kirk said: [The student] got kicked out of school under a Title IX complaint, using the Civil Rights Act, that we as conservatives worship. “Oh, MLK’s a great guy.” Actually MLK was awful. OK? He’s not a good person. He said one good thing he actually didn’t believe. [unintelligible] Go research MLK, you should go research him
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/charlie-kirk-mlk-awful/
@Robert G. Martinengo. Everyone including MLK Jr. has made mistakes in writing and speaking. Does this mean that they were “bad” people and not credible? MLK, Jr. was found guilty of plagiarism but is still an American hero. This is part of the citation taken from SNOPES:
……The committee found that King “is responsible for knowingly misappropriating the borrowed materials that he failed to cite or to cite adequately.” It found a pattern of appropriation of uncited material “that is a straightforward breach of academic norms and that constitutes plagiarism as commonly understood.”
@Robert G. Martinengo. As you may know the 8th Commandment is……“You shall not steal.” Plagiarism is by definition “stealing from some else’s work”. So, since both Charlie Kirk and MLK, Jr. as Christians would consider stealing bad, MLK Jr. did a BAD thing, no?
I think we can agree that all human beings are flawed – that’s what makes us human.
Yes, @Robert G. Martinengo. We CAN agree on that. So, we should not demonize based on those human flaws. Unfortunately, leftists have done exactly this to Donald J. Trump. Orange man BAD on ALL things.
“we should not demonize based on those human flaws”
Great – same goes for Gavin Newsom, right?
@Robert G. Martinengo. That’s a given. The criticism of Newsom by the Globe has been on the basis of his policies or lack thereof. If you think differently, provide some evidence that it has been on the basis of his human flaws. I do not recall anyone on this forum advocating that Newsom should be killed and there have been NO attempts to do so, to my knowledge. He probably has gotten death threats like many politicians these days do. On the other hand, there have been two attempts to kill President Trump. Taking ACTION to silence someone based on political disagreement is the problem.
I was mainly referring to ‘TJ’, who seems rather fixated on Governor Newsom’s hair.
We are all Charlie Kirk now.
Those that value life, liberty, freedom are Charlie Kirk. Not only do we fill the void with voice but more importantly live those values out proudly in action.
Charlie Kirk loves first and foremost the Lord, Family and country.
He understood the foundational truth of the United States of America.
Charlie ran his race and we continue to run ours. I thank God for Charlie Kirk, an honorable man. He lived his life in truth and that is why GenZ gravitated to his message and millions are honoring him worldwide.
We are Charlie Kirk,now.
Thank you, One Fed Up Cali Girl. Well said!
Thank You, Mr.Barajas for writing this opinion piece out of respect to Charlie Kirk and his mission to bring people together.
Free speech is a partisan issue because the totalitarian left hates and fears free speech.
Mr. Barajas stressed that fear cannot be allowed to dictate our voices. Candace Owens, a close friend of Charlie Kirk who was with him from the start of TPUSA, proved that today with the release of a fiery video vowing to do whatever it takes to expose the truth about Charlie Kirk’s assassination and those who might be behind it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czVBmqZP6Ss)
Savanah Hernandez: “Charlie Kirk was our bridge and the left burned it”
https://rumble.com/v6z05kg-charlie-kirk-was-our-bridge-and-the-left-burned-it.html?e9s=rel_v2_ep
Was there a second shooter? Independent journalist Jeff Rense has a video on his website from someone that was at Charlie Kirk’s event. The video was taken from behind where Charlie Kirk was sitting and it looks like a muscular man in a brown shirt standing near the front of the stage turns and then points something directly at Charlie Kirk just before he collapsed. It’s chilling to see. (https://rense.com/)
@TJ. This is how conspiracy theories get propagated. The guy looked like he was just reaching up to scratch his left upper arm when the shot came. There was no second shooter.
It looked awfully suspicious? Maybe watch it again after reading the sequence of events below from Rense’s website:
1. The Brown Shirt Man Is Just Casually Standing Behind The Barrier In Front Of Charlie…With His Left Arm Straight Out And Laying On The Top Horizontal Bar Of The People Barrier. He Is Partially Turned To His Right And Is Not Facing Charlie Straight On. A Security Team Member Would never Turn His Back To The People Behind Him Which He Is Supposed To Be Surveilling. This Is To Better Cover What Is About To Happen.
2. The Brown Shirt Man Then Brings His Right Hand Forward With The Palm Pistol In Position. He Moves His Hand To Below And In Front Of His Left Shoulder And Just Behind His Bicep.
3. The Tiny Barrel Is Just Barely Visible In A Shadow Between His Two Middle Fingers. You Can See The Opening.
4. He Quickly Aims And Fires The Deadly Round Without Any Hesitation. He Is Actually SMILING While He Shoots.
5. Immediately After The Shot, He Pulls His Right Hand Down And Back From His Firing Position…And Either Slides The Little Palm Pistol Into A Front Chest Pocket Or Another Pocket Back Down On His Right Side.
6. In One Fluid Move, He Brings His Now Empty Right Hand Forward And Places It On The Top Of The Barrier. Then, With Both Hands, He Vaults Right Over The Barrier To ‘Help’ Carry Charlie To The SUV Out Back. This Assures The Brown Shirt Man’s Escape In The SUV…Which Also Permits Him To Search For The Bullet.
7. Remember, There Is No Paramedic EMT Ambulance On Site. That Alone Is One Of Many Outrageous Parts Of The Sophisticated, Brutal Plot To assassinate Charlie Kirk.