The assassination in the United States of far-right conservative Charlie Kirk last week has shocked many people in the United States, in Canada, and indeed around the world. It has underlined a serious propensity for political violence from which Canada is not immune.
Bernie Sanders is a veteran American Senator. He is about as far on the left of the political spectrum as one can get. He sits as an Independent in Congress as the Democratic Party is too far to the right for him.
It never occurred to me that I would ever be quoting Bernie Sanders because I differ from him in many ways. However, he has expressed far better than I can the horror and danger related to the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Here is part of what he said a few days ago.
“I want to say a few words about the terrible murder yesterday of Charlie Kirk. He is someone I have disagreed with on almost every issue, but he was clearly a smart and effective communicator, organizer and someone unafraid to get out into the world and engage the public.
“A free and democratic society, which is what America is supposed to be, depends upon the basic premise that people can speak out, organize and take part in public life without fear, without worrying that they might be killed, injured or humiliated in respect to their political views.
“In fact, that is the essence of what freedom is all about and what democracy is all about. Freedom and democracy are not about political violence, are not about assassinating political officials, and are not about trying to intimidate those who speak out on an issue. Political violence in fact is political cowardice. It means that you cannot convince people of the correctness of your ideas and therefore you must impose them. “
I agree with Bernie Sanders. There can be no excuse, no rationalization, for the murder of Charlie Kirk. There was little about his extremism that I agreed with, but he was a champion for debate, dialogue, and free speech.
Charlie Kirk was not an evil man, but he was a man of strong purpose. No individual should be harmed or killed simply because of their opinions. Those people who celebrated online or otherwise over the death of Charlie Kirk should be ashamed of themselves.
The death of Charlie Kirk is a wake-up call to the systemic hate and anger that has become prevalent in the United States and in other parts of the world. It was, in my view, a moment in time when leaders had the ability to reset the public mood and call for more reasonable dialogue and political action without violence. Sadly, that did not happen.
Instead, people on the left and the right blamed each other for the murder of Charlie Kirk. MAGA influencer Steve Bannon viewed it as a declaration of war.
Donald Trump, who could on this occasion have called for national unity, instead did the opposite. He stirred the pot and divided the country.
When asked recently by a reporter, in relation to Charlie Kirk’s murder, to disavow radicals on the right, as well as those on the left, he responded, “I couldn’t care less. The radicals on the right oftentimes are radical because they don’t want to see crime. The radicals on the left are the problem.”
Any reasonable research about the rise of political violence in the United States would prove that it crosses party lines. In recent years, the husband of former Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi was critically attacked. Republican President Donald Trump came close to being assassinated. Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan, a Democrat, came close to being kidnapped. The Speaker of the Minnesota Legislature, Melissa Hortman, also a Democrat, was mowed down along with her husband, and another lawmaker and his wife were stalked and threatened. Also in Minnesota, just weeks ago, an assault on a Catholic Church resulted in the death of two children, and 17 others were injured, mostly youngsters. Charlie Kirk, a conservative, was assassinated. It goes on and on.
The murder of Charlie Kirk appears to be fairly straight forward, the killer identified, charged, and arrested. I am not convinced that is all there is though.
Former FBI Agent Stuart Kaplan said, after the murder but before the killer was identified, “This was a very well planned, well-orchestrated plot that was put in motion days before. This assassination is indicative of a professional hit.”
It is entirely possible that the public murder of Charlie Kirk was the act of a radicalized college student without any help. It is also possible, in my view, that there could be more to it than that, an organized exercise, where there was a single shooter involved, but behind that, the resources and training of a cell of radicals whose sole objective was to create havoc and chaos in the United States. We will probably never know the truth about that.
The bottom line here is that political violence in our society is far too common and must be stopped. But it cannot be used as an excuse or campaign to cut down freedom of speech or the expression of opinion.
There are those who are blaming the assassination of Charlie Kirk on hate speech and advocating for a limitation on free speech. There may be an element of truth in that, but how does one differentiate between hate speech and factual information, which may be very unpleasant?
As an example, there are legitimate comparisons between the Hitler/Nazi regime of years ago and what is taking place in the United States today under the Administration of Donald Trump. If we truly believe in the importance of free speech, how can this be addressed without an accusation of hate speech? How, too, can we address the serious issue of immigration without it being labelled as racism or hate speech?
Clearly, we are in an era of increased political violence. To a lesser degree, but still a real matter of concern, we can see this in Canada as well as in the United States and in some other countries.
Elected politicians are requiring more security. Whipping up partisan political bases with extreme and apocalyptic language is often evident. Also, a lack of dialogue between people with different ideologies leads to a vacuum where those with different viewpoints stop talking to each other and other less desirable and hurtful strategies emerge.
Whatever else one may want to say about Charlie Kirk, he was an advocate of free speech and debate. It truly says something horrific about the state of democracy when one can be brutally murdered for that, regardless of their political views.
Hugh Mackenzie
Hugh Mackenzie has held elected office as a trustee on the Muskoka Board of Education, a Huntsville councillor, a District councillor, and mayor of Huntsville. He has also served as chairman of the District of Muskoka and as chief of staff to former premier of Ontario, Frank Miller.
Hugh has also served on a number of provincial, federal and local boards, including chair of the Ontario Health Disciplines Board, vice-chair of the Ontario Family Health Network, vice-chair of the Ontario Election Finance Commission, and board member of Roy Thomson Hall, the National Theatre School of Canada, and the Anglican Church of Canada. Locally, he has served as president of the Huntsville Rotary Club, chair of Huntsville District Memorial Hospital, chair of the Huntsville Hospital Foundation, president of Huntsville Festival of the Arts, and board member of Community Living Huntsville.
In business, Hugh Mackenzie has a background in radio and newspaper publishing. He was also a founding partner and CEO of Enterprise Canada, a national public affairs and strategic communications firm established in 1986.
Currently, Hugh is president of C3 Digital Media Inc., the parent company of Doppler Online, and he enjoys writing commentary for Huntsville Doppler.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox six times per week!
Click here to support local news
Agreed…
‘Legitimate comparisons to the Nazis with what is happening in the US”
Sad, but so typical of what is reported in the Canadian MSM.
You disappoint me Hugh.