America has made state-sanctioned targeted assassination and murder a tool of its foreign policy, certainly tolerating and sanctioning such atrocities on the part of their proxies.
I may need to open with a disclaimer about the potentially provocative title so there is no confusion and so no mistakes or misunderstandings occur.
A quick reading of the title, without much thought, could give rise to the belief that I am engaging in “whataboutism” to attempt to justify the murder of Charlie Kirk by perhaps framing it in the context of wider and more numerous political assassinations across the globe.
That is not the case.
There is no basis by which anybody could justify the cowardly assassination of Charlie Kirk, who was a peaceful activist, speaker, and writer.
Mr. Kirk was a true American patriot, and he did not deserve to be cruelly and coldly cut down by a coward’s bullet, particularly while his family watched him die before their eyes.
Mr. Kirk never hurt anybody, he never threatened anybody, and he never offered harm to anybody. He offered the truth, and the enemies of the truth murdered him for it.
Having clarified and established that point, I feel comfortable proceeding forward to get to the heart of the issue. The American system has normalized casual political violence abroad, and it has finally come home in a big way.
In recent years America has directly or indirectly (through proxies or client states) been responsible for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, Hassan Nasrallah, Darya Dugina, Vladlen Tatarsky, Saleh al-Arouri, and Ismail Haniyeh, and looking back to 2011, the USA/NATO/West was instrumental in creating the circumstances that allowed their proxies and mercenaries to murder Muammar Gaddafi and one of his sons. The murder of Muammar Gaddafi was particularly disgusting in light of the reports he was tortured, abused, and sodomized with an object prior to being shot. It wasn’t enough for Washington’s proxies to murder the man; they had to humiliate him, abuse him, and violate him before taking his life. Gaddafi dared to challenge France’s currency control in West Africa in the former French colonies that are just now beginning to finally shake off French neo-colonial rule, so from the French perspective, Gaddafi had to die; that France was able to pocket Libya’s gold reserves in the aftermath of the NATO-orchestrated destruction of the Libyan state and society was simply icing on the cake, or as we in the USA might say, “gravy.”
My point about the violence the USA has sowed around the world is not to try to grandstand and claim, “Ah ha! The chickens are coming home to roost!” or any variation of “the USA deserves this political violence” or to insist or even suggest, “Charlie Kirk deserved this.” The American people do not deserve to suffer political violence, nor did Charlie Kirk deserve what happened to him. However, we must realize and understand that we have allowed our elite to normalize political violence, especially abroad, such that we are conditioned to accept the drone strike assassination, missile striking, or car-bombing of some “other” in some “other” land, where we are taught to accept that “this sort of thing happens” because “those others” are “just that way” in “that place.” We are conditioned to believe that “drone strikes on weddings or funerals are normal and to be expected” “over there.”
Meanwhile, in the USA, the Left (TM, copyright, patent pending) has long ago sold out and gone from being edgy anti-consumerist activists raging against the machine to the very machine they once swore to destroy. In the USA and essentially all of the collective West, the Left is no longer anti-establishment because the Left is the establishment. It is as though the Bolsheviks got a taste of power, found they liked it, and then decided that the withering of the state, dismantling institutions, and a classless, stateless utopian society could wait, perhaps indefinitely, because they were enjoying being in charge. We’re all supposed to be equal, but somebody has to be in charge, right?
Charlie Kirk stood in the way of their propaganda mill; he was a counterrevolutionary conservative warrior on the front lines of the culture war, in the universities, peacefully engaging people with his ideas. He was a dire cultural threat to the Left, and they murdered him for it. These are the same people who call for violence against President Trump, who call for the illegal and immoral arrest (or worse) of President Putin, citing absurd ICC arrest warrants. As a brief aside, the idea of arresting a sitting head of state on bogus charges promulgated on flimsy theories that relocating refugees out of a war zone is “kidnapping” and a “war crime” is clear abuse of legal process and a violation of the norms and customs of international law. It is irresponsible and not conducive to sound and efficient international relations in the context of the reality of ongoing and developing geopolitical situations.
Charlie Kirk was a decent man, a good family man, a salt-of-the-earth man from a blue-collar high school graduate (not college graduate) background, who cultivated his intellect in a self-taught manner. The Left not only hated him, they hated what he represented. Charlie Kirk offered to peacefully debate and discuss matters of concern for his generation, and the left killed him for it. This is the same Left that applauded the murder of Darya Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky, so it shouldn’t come as any surprise to normal Americans that these Non-Player Characters, these modern American Leftists, not only approve killing Charlie Kirk, they (as a collective entity) killed him.
As to those on the left, not one of them has a single independent rational thought that is original and of their own. They can’t be bargained with; they can’t be reasoned with. They don’t feel pity or remorse or fear, and they absolutely will not stop, ever, until civilization is dead (they are the Terminator, but targeting civilization, not Sarah Connor or John Connor). They will kill peaceful men and laugh at the widows and joke about coming back to finish off the widows and make the children orphans, as some particularly twisted commentators on the left said should happen to Charlie Kirk’s children, with the added suggestion that they called for transitioning his children. This is what they think of us. These are the people who gleefully rub their hands together and make disgusting posts in the comments sections of videos showing Russian soldiers dying from drone strikes in Donbas, accompanied by despicable racist remarks about “orks.” The lives of these Leftists are so void of spiritual calling that they celebrate the murder of a peaceful man in the presence of his wife and children, and they applaud the deaths of young soldiers who are doing their duty to defend their homeland. These people are moral black holes.
Perhaps we should pray for them, maybe we even pity them, and we might ultimately extend mercy to them, but for now we must oppose them, and we must stand guard against them.
The Kiev bandits who murdered Darya Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky did over there to their enemies, what American leftists did over here to Charlie Kirk and what the left wants to do to proponents of traditional civilization everywhere they encounter them around the world. American leftists wish they had the state level of support that the Kiev bandits enjoy. If American leftists had the state power to do so, they would kill World War Two veterans in their beds, because those men denounce American leftists for being tyrannical oppressors similar to the sort that the veterans of World War Two fought to banish.
The American establishment has normalized political violence across the world, and American media has applauded it or tacitly approved it. Indeed, a full 25% of those who identify as “very liberal” and 17% of those identifying as “liberal” agreed with the statement that “political violence can sometimes be justified.” Only 55% agreed that “political violence is never justified.”
In another poll it was determined that approximately 28% of Democrats and 31% of Republicans believe that the country is on the wrong track and “violence may be necessary to right the country.”
Rather than looking abroad for wars to intervene in, deepen, and prolong, the US should be looking for wars to avoid a civil war here at home. The US may not be on the verge of an imminent civil war, but normalized political violence and conditions approaching low-intensity insurrection may be just over the horizon, something hotter than Northern Ireland’s The Troubles but less intense than the Mexican Drug War. Keep in mind that between 2019 and 2024, Americans purchased an estimated 104 million firearms, with an estimation of more than 500 million guns in civilian hands in the USA.
I like guns as much as the next American (probably more so), but in the context of recent and ongoing political violence and polarization, it is a bit disheartening to see that Americans are arming to the hilt, presumably in anticipation of slaughtering their neighbors.
We can no more solve our domestic problems through combat with our neighbors than we can solve our foreign problems through combat with foreign competitors (or partners, adversaries, or potential future rivals). I am not entirely sure what term is most appropriate for Russia. I do not view them as an enemy or a threat, but they may be a rival of the current USA Deep State Regime. From my perspective, it would be most appropriate to characterize Russia as a potential partner and a potential competitor, but I don’t see any basis to have an adversarial or hostile relationship.
Charlie Kirk rests in peace after having been cruelly and ruthlessly murdered by the forces of hate; the nation he so loved may not enjoy peace for much longer. If we wish to honor the legacy we inherit from him, we must do so through dialogue, respect, and understanding, which extends to our foreign comrades on the world stage. Our cousins in Moscow should be treated with the same respect we have traditionally reserved for those in London, Paris, and Berlin.
Bryan Anthony Reo is a licensed attorney based in Ohio and an analyst of military history, geopolitics, and international relations
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
