It’s been a week…. A week of watching reactions to Charlie Kirk’s assassination and I’m just as disappointed as I thought I would be. I’ve seen it everywhere on social media, TV, podcasts. Those who cannot bring themselves to simply say that all political violence is wrong. Murder is wrong. Being assassinated in front of your wife and children is wrong. Full stop. No caveats.
Yet almost unfailingly, from those who disliked Charlie Kirk, comes the “but.” They say things like:
“Charlie Kirk didn’t deserve to be murdered, but he said things I think are harmful and hurtful.”
“Charlie Kirk didn’t deserve to be murdered, but words are violence.”
“Charlie Kirk didn’t deserve to be murdered, but he was racist, sexist, hateful, and a fascist.”
It’s the same kind of twisted victim-blaming logic we rightly reject in other contexts:
“That woman didn’t deserve to be assaulted, but she was dressed provocatively and did drink a lot of alcohol.”
“That man didn’t deserve to be robbed, but he shouldn’t have been in that neighborhood.”
We don’t accept these excuses in those instance, nor should we here. Even if every accusation uttered about Kirk were true about the things he said or the opinions he had, there is still no “but.” An innocent man lost his life to an assassin’s bullet for speaking words. Every “but” only builds upon the permission structures for violence that made his murder possible.
When we qualify our condemnation of any violence, political or otherwise, we normalize it. The moment we allow a “but” is the moment we decide some lives are expendable. And once that bell is rung, it can’t be undone.
Elizabeth Banak Books 