The Death of Dialogue

The murder of Charlie Kirk on a Utah university campus marks a disturbing moment for free speech in America. When people are killed for expressing their beliefs, our universities—once the heart of open debate—become symbols of fear and division. This tragedy forces us to ask whether we still value dialogue over violence in our democracy.

After Charlie's death, the reactions online revealed a painful truth about the state of public discourse today. Two sides quickly formed: those who understood the gravity of what had happened and what it could lead to, and those who didn’t. Tens of thousands of accounts on TikTok, Instagram, and Twitter posted comments such as “Kind of ironic since he didn’t want stricter gun laws,” or “He was pro-life, so he deserved it,” along with countless videos celebrating the death of a thirty-one-year-old man, husband, and father. What shocked me was not that I shared Charlie’s opinions or felt personally connected to him, but that he was killed for having and sharing his beliefs—and people celebrated it. It is as if those who rejoiced in his death have forgotten what it means to live in a civilized democracy, where disagreement should lead to dialogue, not dehumanization. Even when we strongly oppose someone’s views, they should still have the right to live and speak freely.

In the days following the incident, many people reacted publicly, revealing how divided opinions have become around free speech and political violence. One such person is Dr. Sam Richards from Penn State university livestreamed and uploaded his lecture where he spoke about the issue with his students the day after the incident. As he is speaking to his students, trying to bring them down to earth about what really happened here, he asks "What's next?", to provoke thought and for the students to really reflect, but instead he is met with criticism towards Charlie's ideas about what he did and who he spoke to. One student answered "I'm afraid that his death won't be utilized in the right way, that people won't think about what he believed, when he got shot and what he was talking about when it happened" and one student even asked if Dr. Richards had seen if Charlie's opinions had developed "In the right way" before his death, as if that would even be a factor in how we should view his death, as if the students opinions is the definite "right way" and as if people who disagree with "the right way" shouldn’t be able to speak.

What I and Dr. Richards saw was not Charlie's beliefs, not his ideals and not what he was speaking about when he got shot, we saw a man getting assassinated for speaking to other people. Instead his students and these accounts on social media saw him dead on a screen and decided to post on Tik-Tok "One more Nazi dead" with a video of them dancing and celebrating. The reality of this incident was that as a consequence of Charlie Kirk going out to the streets of America seeking dialogue he was murdered. Murdered for sharing his opinion, and for allowing his opinion to be challenged. What this sort of incident invites is the exact path the United States once took to civil war, "Oh sorry we don't agree with each other? That means I get to shoot you", which is exactly what Dr. Sam Richards was trying to get at. But instead we get this other interpretation from social media where we are actually glad that he got shot, simply because we didn't agree with what he was saying anyways therefore; “it was okay this time”.

Through the thick smog of this situation, another voice stood out; namely, the influential leftist youtuber ShoeOnHead. She released a video talking about the incident in which she highlighted that this was an act of political violence and not a joke. In her video she highlighted the need for publicly allowed civil discourse saying "They don't shoot you because your a nazi, they call you a nazi so they can shoot you", she goes on to explain that people need to be allowed to disagree with each other and that celebrating or believing it is okay that people die for their beliefs is a dark path that leads nowhere good.

So I want to leave you, the reader a message: Let your ideas be challenged, talk to people, and realise that dialogue is not just good for society, it is necessary if we want to stop the polarization of our world. We need to be able to speak to each other without having our life on the line and when an incident like this happens, do not be happy that an act of terrorism was made. Instead, remind yourself that democracy only exists if we are allowed to believe what we want to believe.

Franke Bengtsson