Political Violence is Wrong, Mourning Kirk is Optional, Hypocrisy is Everywhere

 Political violence is always wrong. Always. Anyone who tries to argue otherwise is either insane, dishonest, or just loves chaos. Shooting someone because you dislike their opinions is beneath contempt, beneath common decency, and frankly, beneath explanation. But here’s the thing nobody wants to say: mourning Charlie Kirk is optional. Optional. You are under no moral obligation to light a candle, post a heartfelt social media tribute, or pretend the world has lost a saint. Kirk’s brain was like a rusted gearbox in a 1970s Lada—creaking, failing catastrophically, and emitting fumes of ignorance strong enough to kill small wildlife.

And what ideas did he offer? Oh, just a parade of moral flatulence so noxious it could choke a small city. Nuremberg-style trials for doctors. “Some gun deaths” are worth it to protect the Second Amendment. Women should submit to their husbands, Martin Luther King was “awful,” and empathy is a made-up new-age fairy tale. Civil rights? A “huge mistake.” Climate change and vaccines? Apparently myths dreamed up by scientists with nothing better to do. And yet, because some unhinged individual decided to pull a trigger, the far-right parades him like he’s the second coming of Churchill, clutching their pearls and pretending they’re defending free speech. Watching it is like seeing a gorilla try to pilot a Concorde: absurd, terrifying, and faintly hilarious.

Let’s be clear: assassination is vile. Reprehensible. Repulsive. But the real comedy—and tragedy—is the hypocrisy. Kirk’s death has handed the far-right a martyr while allowing them to pose as defenders of free speech. These are the same people banning books in Florida, muzzling scientists, auditing museums for daring to say “slavery was bad,” and threatening universities that refuse to kneel to their ideology. They are the foxes complaining the henhouse is unsafe, and yet they expect applause for it. It’s hypocrisy so vast it could have its own zip code.

Meanwhile, guns in the U.S. are as common as soggy fries in a motorway service station. Lone wolves lurk everywhere. Political assassinations are depressingly easy. But let’s not kid ourselves: the greatest threat to free speech doesn’t come from unhinged individuals. No, it comes from those with power. The ones banning books, cutting funding for climate science, deporting activists, silencing universities, and treating democracy like a second-hand sports car they’re driving blindfolded. Kirk’s assassin? Just a man with a gun. The real danger is the government with the throttle fully open.

So here’s the bottom line: political violence is vile. Guns make it worse. Kirk’s death is tragic on a human level. But nobody should glorify him, nobody should mourn him as a hero, and nobody should allow his corpse to be hijacked by the far-right as a symbol of moral righteousness. He was not a saint. Not a martyr. Not a genius. Mourning him is optional. Glorifying him is dangerous. And if the far-right tries to use this tragedy to silence everyone else while clutching their moral compass like a damp umbrella in a hurricane, they should be laughed at—mercilessly, repeatedly, and with the sort of derision that could echo all the way to Washington D.C.

And for heaven’s sake, let’s stop pretending that political violence and free speech are somehow compatible when wielded by hypocrites. Kirk is gone, and good riddance to his ideas. But if we let his corpse become a tool in the hands of those who would throttle democracy, then the joke’s not on him—it’s on all of us. And that, my friends, would be a tragedy I would describe as “spectacularly, unforgivably, catastrophically idiotic.