On September 10th, 2025, as most people know, Christian nationalist debater Charlie Kirk was assassinated at his own political debate session in front of hundreds of people, with footage of his death spreading like wildfire on the news and across the internet.
That day the political landscape felt akin to a wildfire with tons of celebration, tons of people speaking out against political violence, and tons of angry people complaining about the “violent left.” Everyone was talking about Charlie Kirk; it felt like he became one of the most famous people in the country overnight. People wrote post after post about his passing; even President Trump gave his condolences.
What bothers me about this whole situation stems from how much attention he got. I understand that it was awful to watch someone get shot and killed, but this is one guy. There are multiple statues of him, one in New York and one in Utah. People tried naming a highway after him.
While Democrats joked, arguably in poor taste, the right took this as an act of political violence against them, which many used as an opportunity to unite Republicans together, painting Democrats as violent.
The attention he got after his death feels unwarranted, especially considering the United States has a regular school shooting problem where many children have been shot and killed from this. Why does one adult man’s death get nationwide attention when incidents resulting in multiple children dying do not? Because Charlie Kirk was a name people recognized. Charlie Kirk had an audience; a lot of people directly cared about him since they watched him on YouTube or TikTok. The unfortunate mindset of a lot of people stems from only caring about those who they know; people felt like they knew Charlie Kirk, like he was a part of their life, and they watched him die live on video. Nobody knows your average Joe’s high schooler son; many chalk it up as another unfortunate death part of the “unfortunate reality” of the hostile American landscape, then go on with their day. To many people with Charlie Kirk, it felt like they lost someone they knew, so it hurt way more. Republicans weaponized this sadness into anger to unite the people and keep Charlie Kirk relevant. Democrats are making fun of him, so paint it as an act of political violence; it was a chance to stir the kettle.
I think it’s sad that this attention only comes from his fame. I think people should be this upset about school shootings, but we’ve become so numb to it as a country that people try their best to ignore it. The mindset where people only care about those they know has caused so many problems where people have zero empathy for their fellow man. There’ll be excuses like “Oh, we don’t have time to be angry” or “We don’t have the mental fortitude to get angry at every little thing,” and to that I say, “You should.” You should be angry about the environment of violence we exist in, the one that’s taken so many lives away. People should care more about children like these because they are their own because they very much could be. It baffles me people have selective empathy like it’s a limited resource, and it baffles me people choose to look at one thing over thinking about the big picture and what should get done because of it. I hope people think more about gun control because of Charlie Kirk, but I highly doubt it.
