Opinion | My final thoughts on Charlie Kirk

Photo collage by Easton Clark, Photo Editor

On Sept. 10, 2025, conservative radio host and activist Charlie Kirk was shot and killed while speaking at Utah Valley University. Known for being the co-founder and CEO of conservative nonprofit Turning Point USA, Kirk was the most prominent face of the American right’s youth movement, and a key figure in the MAGA movement's origins and resurgence. He is survived by his wife Erika and two young children.

It would be dishonest of me not to admit that when I first learned of the shooting, my reaction was bitterness towards Kirk, especially before learning of his critical condition and, eventually, death. I myself have experienced a shooting that claimed the lives of two of my classmates, whose deaths alongside thousands of others Kirk had waved off as “a cost” worthy of the 2nd Amendment. I also have a plethora of friends and family members who are part of marginalized groups that Kirk relentlessly lambasted and ostracized up until his untimely death. Why should I try to empathize with him when he never offered it to myself or those I cared about?

But in the hours since his death, my bitterness has been swallowed by a numb, emotionless void. Kirk’s death will have severe repercussions for America’s political landscape, repercussions I am loath to witness. But I have also come to the conclusion that while I do not mourn Kirk, I also do not laugh bitterly at him. Instead, I empathize with and mourn the position he placed himself in.

From an emotionless standpoint, it is easy to understand why Kirk started down the path he ended on. Born in 1993 in Illinois, Kirk was a late millennial, a member of a generation known for despair, and for good reason. Kirk was a conservative from his youth, but his radicalization requires a deeper look. The end of his formative years lined up with 9/11 and the subsequent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which created a reasonable fear of terror followed by a radical distrust for neoliberal governments in many other members of his generation. He came of age during the 2008 economic crisis, and was a young adult throughout the Obama administration, who had many successes as president, but many failings as well.

Across the political aisle, younger generations have held more and more cynical views of where the world is going, which is one of the key reasons for the political polarization we see today. And for Kirk, that meant retreating further into his outspoken conservatism. So when he met marketing retiree Bill Montgomery, it was not a surprise that Turning Point USA and its goals of passing down Kirk’s conservatism to a new generation of the disheartened was the result.

I want to make clear that I do not believe that Charlie Kirk was anywhere near a good man. He made use of slurs, defended rape, attacked MLK and the Civil Rights Movement and committed a plethora of other condemnable acts. But I understand why he appealed to so many young Americans. His youth, performative debates and penchant for the viral clip made him stand out from the sea of boomers and Silent Generationals that still largely make up American politics.

That being said, he never offered solutions, only scapegoats. Politicians lie, and so do political commentators. Just because words comfort you does not make them true. It was never the gays or the trans community or Black people or any other marginalized group he routinely demonized that were responsible for the distraught present we find ourselves in. Instead, it is the very people that propped him up who are responsible for where we are at.

Between the reaction to the Luigi Mangione case and the continued controversy around the Epstein files, I think it’s safe to say that the majority of Gen Z across the political spectrum are not fans of the ultrawealthy elite. And rightfully so. Their immense greed and absorption of money is the reason why many American jobs have been shipped overseas, why price gouging has been an issue for years, why crucial government programs like Medicare and Medicaid are being slashed to pieces and why there doesn’t seem to be any hope for the future. So if Turning Point USA were truly dedicated to fighting for a better future, wouldn’t they have rejected money coming from anywhere but the common man?

I will now list some of the largest donations to Turning Point’s PAC during the 2023-24 election cycle outside of their subsidiaries:

• $495,000 from Stephen A. Wynn, a Las Vegas luxury real estate mogul and alleged sexual predator with a net worth of $3.9 billion.

• $495,000 from Thomas D. Klingenstein, a hedge fund manager and heir with a net worth of $2.3 billion.

• $300,000 from Event Strategies Inc, an event-planning corporation heavily used by Trump and his associates for grandiose functions.

• $145,000 from Frederick Dulap, an investor and former healthcare CEO.

That is in addition to their deep ties to the billionaire industrialist Koch family and their Heritage Foundation (net worth $73.8 billion), or their initial funding from now-deceased investment manager Foster Friess (net worth $140 million). The more you dig, the more the hard pill to swallow becomes clear: Turning Point never cared about you unless you were an elite with eight to 10 figures in your account and a fat check to write.

With all that being said, I don’t think that Charlie Kirk was necessarily an elite. Yes, he made quite a lot of money off what he did, with a reported net worth of around $12 million. But any of the names I listed above could have probably met moderate success if they had cut out the middle man and done political advocacy on their own. But that would have meant putting their own elitist faces on your screens. If the reaction to the death of United Healthcare’s Brian Thompson is anything to go by, then that would have meant hanging their necks out.

Kirk certainly believed his own words, and he wasn’t used unwillingly. He was fully conscious as he peddled poison to audiences and branded it patriotism. But to his megadonors, he was nothing more than a spokesperson. A bodyguard. A human shield. As far as the elites are concerned, Charlie Kirk’s death means he has fulfilled his ultimate purpose, because it wasn’t them who got shot.

Charlie Kirk spent over a decade misdirecting justified anger away from the real problems and towards culture war nonsense so that the elites of our country could reap a better profit unnoticed, but at the end of the day, he was expendable to them, and he died a tragic, meaningless death for it.

To the supporters and family of Charlie Kirk, I would like to offer a sincere apology for my initial reaction, and I am truly sorry that you lost a man who may have been a beacon of hope for you. But if you truly care about him, please don’t let another soul take his place.