Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 09/14/2025 4:32:36 AM PDT by MtnClimber
If by chance you were unaware of Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated while speaking at Utah Valley University this week, he was a very articulate debater who treated respectfully those who debated him. He espoused views which were perfectly normal, a defender of the West, Israel, and Christianity, enlightenment views which matched those of the Founders and are encapsulated in the Constitution. You may see videos of his debates on the internet. He was skillful at it and had thousands of young followers. Indeed, many consider his successful work a big factor in youth support for the President. As shocking as the assassination is -- an assassination which took place in the view of his wife and young daughter -- more shocking still was the outpouring online of vitriolic hate for him and support for his murder. There’s an odd juxtaposition in this. Some decades ago, Mao’s CCP encouraged critics of the communist regime to speak up. They were shocked to find out how much disagreement with their policies there was and the brave (or feckless) ones who believed the Hundred Flowers campaign was a genuine effort to encourage free speech found themselves in prison, re-education camps or dead.
In a way, I’m reminded of that campaign this week, people -- mostly educators, medical professionals, media members, government employees, and even some acting military and one Secret Service member -- expressed the most repulsive, anti-democratic views in supporting the assassination. They did so in the mistaken belief propagated mostly by teachers, universities, the media, Democrat officials, and celebrities, that these views were anodyne and held by all right thinkers. As they face consequences -- shunning, firing, loss of business, loss of visas -- many of these same people are posting videos of themselves crying in shock that the views
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
I am glad that they let us know who they are.
My thought: Sure, the comments are despicable, but they are also protected by our 1st Amendment. (The line of course is inciting more violence.)
But we won’t be happy when the left is back in power and turns mass firings around on conservatives who express views unpopular with the powers that be.
I am really concerned about the ones who did not. THEY are the clear and present danger.
Celebrating murder is not free speech
It is Incitement to violence, which is illegal in virtually every jurisdiction.
Killing Charlie was meant to quell dissent. That’s exactly why he was killed.
By the way, did he have on a plate over his chest and did the bullet richochet off of that? Haven’t seen actual proof...
My thought: Sure, the comments are despicable, but they are also protected by our 1st Amendment. (The line of course is inciting more violence.)
____________________________________
People forget that the Bill of Rights apply to the government on private citizens. Yes, you are free to speak your mind but your words are not free from consequences from fellow citizens in the private arena. This is what the Left is now having to come to grips with.
The day after the assassination, Andrew Wilcow said...
There are two kinds of democrats today.
Those cheering out loud, and those cheering silently.
That depends on the exact words used.
Also,
Sounds like the framework for a political force calling themselves “I$l@m”
“If you believe free speech is for you but not your political opponents, you’re illiberal. If no contrary evidence could change your beliefs, you’re a fundamentalist. If you believe the state should punish those with contrary views, you’re a totalitarian. If you believe political opponents should be punished with violence or death, you’re a terrorist.”
yes
and he was a very effective dissenter
A Turning Point? The Death of Charlie Kirk and the Possible Collapse of Progressive Ideology
By The Hermit
History often moves not in steady, predictable steps but in sudden lurches—shaped by moments so symbolic, so emotionally charged, that they become catalysts for greater change. For some, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 marked such a turning point: the end of postwar American innocence, the beginning of deep national mistrust, and the slow unraveling of the consensus that had defined mid-century America.
Now, six decades later, we may be witnessing the other bookend to that era.
The death of Charlie Kirk, a leading voice of youthful conservative activism, has sent shockwaves through American political culture. While history will need time to assign meaning to this event, one must ask: could this be the moment when conservatives finally say, “Enough”? Could it mark the beginning of the end of Progressive ideological dominance in the United States?
The Context of a Fractured Nation
For years, the American political left—broadly represented by progressive ideology—has expanded its influence across nearly all major institutions: education, media, entertainment, corporate HR departments, even certain religious communities. In many of these areas, dissenting views were not just discouraged but aggressively marginalized. Conservatives, for the most part, either adapted quietly or withdrew—sometimes creating their own spaces, sometimes conceding ground entirely.
But there’s a growing sense that something fundamental has shifted. The quiet majority is no longer so quiet. The outrage over cultural upheaval, institutional overreach, and the erosion of national identity has turned into a simmering anger. And now, with the death of Charlie Kirk, that anger may reach a boiling point.
Charlie Kirk as a Symbol
Charlie Kirk was not just a political commentator—he was a symbol of generational pushback. Unlike older conservatives often on the defensive, Kirk represented a new, unapologetic right that refused to cede moral ground to progressivism. He spoke directly to young people, challenged the left’s control of academia, and dared to confront institutional narratives. Whether one agreed with his rhetoric or not, his influence was undeniable.
If JFK’s death accelerated the fragmentation of American unity and opened the door to the cultural revolution of the late ‘60s and ‘70s, Kirk’s death may have the inverse effect: a unifying event for conservative resurgence, a moment of collective realization that passivity is no longer an option.
Is Progressivism Now Overextended?
Every ideology, when pushed too far, begins to falter under the weight of its own contradictions. Progressivism once stood for noble goals: civil rights, equality under the law, and fair opportunity. But in recent years, many believe it has mutated into something far more divisive—redefining language, punishing dissent, and promoting a moral superiority that alienates as much as it persuades.
We see this overreach in policies that prioritize illegal immigrants over citizens, in efforts to rewrite history, and in the erasure of traditional values that once unified communities. The backlash is already visible: increasing political polarization, growing distrust in media, and the rise of grassroots conservative movements across the country.
The death of Charlie Kirk may solidify that backlash into a coherent force.
A New Conservative Awakening?
Unlike the reaction to JFK’s death, which fractured a generation, the reaction to Kirk’s death may consolidate one. This time, it’s not about radical rebellion—but restoration. Not revolution—but return. A return to principles: limited government, free speech, individual responsibility, and national sovereignty.
Could Kirk’s death mark the beginning of a new conservative awakening? That remains to be seen. But the mood is changing. The ground beneath the progressive movement appears less solid. The appeal to institutional power—once seen as a strength—is now seen by many as an abuse. People are waking up, and they are not happy with what they see.
Conclusion: The Bookends of a Cultural Era?
From JFK to Kirk, we may indeed be witnessing the closing of a long and painful chapter in American political life. One that began with hope, spiraled into division, and now may find resolution in renewal.
Whether the death of Charlie Kirk becomes a true turning point in history is something only time will tell. But if it is, it will be because millions of Americans—quiet for too long—decided that the time for silence had ended.
They remembered what it meant to love their country, and they chose to fight for it.
In the words of Thumper rabbit: “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say nothing at all.” We can all practice being more kind.
And the golden rule: treat others as one would like to be treated.
So many both on the left and the right are easily misinformed by both the MSM as well as social media, and with all the ai stuff now it’s getting harder and harder to know whats real. Many of those on the left who espouse a hatred for Charlie Kirk have never taken the time to hear him in his own words.
You go that broadly and they’ll go incredibly broadly on you.
You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater. You can, however, say good riddance to a theater being burned down.
It’s also not an incitement to violence or they’d all be arrested.
AMEN!!!! ALL DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL!!
And it will come back around at us. That’s all.
Anarchists ran wild in the late 19th century. There back.
“Killing Charlie was meant to quell dissent.”
Ain’t gonna happen, not 12 million but many will no longer be quiet. I would not voice dissent - just not worth the trouble, I do not feel that way any longer as I suspect many may feel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.