In response to those who use Kirk's assassination as an excuse for more violence in revenge

 On another social media site to which I belong, I was shocked by some whose response to the assassination of Charlie Kirk was revenge against those they hated...Obama, Pelosi, Soros, and a whole list of political adversaries...and said it was time for a CIVIL WAR (yes, in caps). I hear there are those on the lib side" who also vowed violence, though none on the social media sites I follow.. The lunatics on both sides are the enemies to our ability to pursue a goal and rights "granted by our Creator" we all should share, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, of life, liberty, and happiness. I was heartened by those who said political violence was a blow against democracy. Democracy is still the best way to achieve such lofty and universal aspirations.

I realize some do not give a twit about democracy. They are so bound up by either ignorance of what the alternatives are or those who feel the only way that counts is their way and seek a government that only rules on their behalf, the rest of the country and world be damned. Those who do not march in lock step with them should be beaten down and suppressed using whatever means they have, including violence.. To those who think that, all I can say is what goes around comes around, and the circle of violence only expands and accelerates until there are more and more victims in the grave on both sides. There are no happy endings in history, as even the victors or the governments they espoused based on hate, violence, and suppression eventually fall victim to themselves, either in suicide in a bunker or hanged by those they once suppressed. That should be the lesson we learned from the last century of world wars and revolutions, from the rise of totalitarianism (dictatorial control over governmental power, everyday life, thought, and culture) to Bosnia's war of ethnic cleansing. It may take years for this to unfold, but the old adage "those who live with the sword, die with the sword" has some truth.  So few of us have lived or experienced this. Too few of us know the history of what we have not seen with our own eyes. We are condemned to repeat it. Democracy's greatest asset is that it provides a plan and way for humans to pursue life, liberty, and happiness without violent conflict, instead.

To perpetuate the unending circle of political violence, the leader in chief of revenge on political adversaries is our own president, Donald Trump, who was quick to beat the drums of hate and retribution in the wake of the Kirk assassination. But there were also some on "the other side" who did likewise. Or, as New York Times opinion writer, David French, noted:" there are monsters in your midst, too". The exact count of who has the most monsters, red or blue? The libertarian CATO institute has some figures. After the 9/11 foreign terrorists, the right is in second place in the count of those perpetrating political violence in the US. Politically Motivated Violence Is Rare in the United States | Cato at Liberty Blog

Trump Escalates Attacks on Political Opponents After Charlie Kirk’s Killing - The New York Times   

   MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Trump fans the flames of violence, yet calls himself the law and order president updated

"To get past this dreadful moment, more and more Americans are going to have to face a painful fact. Evil isn’t confined to one side of the American divide. There are monsters in your midst, too. Opinion | There Are Monsters in Your Midst, Too - The New York Times

Trump Puts Democrat Senator in His Place for Rejecting God-Given Rights. The pertinent question in the USA is not who gives the rights, but what rights our nation should support. Cain is right in one regard: if you do not have a government that supports those rights given by God, you do not have those rights. The government plays a role in supporting or subverting those rights, whether in the USA or abroad, as do the theologians in power in their respective countries. Trump is correct in one respect: our founders saw rights as those granted by God, but on the other hand, he seeks to oppress those upholding those rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as listed in the Declaration. He uses or supports violence, military force, and all the power of the federal executive, which he can abuse to punish and suppress those who write, advocate, and support his political enemies. Our founders protected rights from being taken away in the Bill of Rights. 

The founders also viewed government as an instrument for granting rights they had identified as inalienable. That was their unique contribution used to offset a too powerful federal government, as well as the separation and balance of powers. I draw heavily on this conclusion from https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/first-principles-what-americas-founders-learned-from-the-greeks-and-romans-and-how-that-shaped-our-country_thomas-e-ricks/

Pam Bondi ignited a firestorm within her own party when she appeared to promote DOJ action against those who indulge in "hate speech".  Later clarification by her better defined what hate speech was: that which exhorted violence.  I have a suggestion that Pam Bondi, as her first act of prosecution against hate speech, should target what influenced the Evergreen High School shooter. It is reported that He had spent much time on a neo nazi site. If that site advocated the use of violence and murder, that is not far from the famous standard of what is free speech and what is not: falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater is not free speech. This country has "monsters among us" and is a tinder box of extreme partisanship and wide gulfs in opinions. Social media is full of those who howl for violence and death to their opponents and who ignite deranged minds to act out what they see urged in such sites. We, the onlookers and the audience, independent, non-partisan, or partisan, are the victims in the crowded theater, bewildered about who to believe, and some are panicked to make a run for it, even though many are trampled into the debris.

Charlie Kirk's widow,Erika, speaks from a very different viewpoint than Bondi and Trump. It is a beautiful speech, a sermon, that reflects a different and a more fundamental and profound compass of traditional Christianity than what is in vogue now.. FULL SPEECH: Erika Kirk speaks at Charlie Kirk memorial service. That did not mean I agree with  Kirk's application of his faith on every issue facing America and dividing America, but he had represented something very important: the willingness in a democracy to engage in debate freely, and it is that that Bondi and Trump want to destroy and recreate to only reflect their version of truth and convey only news that benefits their regime with no debate to give other viewpoints. I admire Erika's ability to speak her truth and faith so soon after the horrific death of her most beloved. I was unable to do so after my late husband's passing. I was dumbstruck by the emotion. 

oops. DOJ Deletes Its Own Study From Website Showing ‘Far More’ Domestic Terrorism Committed by ‘Far-Right Extremists’

Oh, but wait, in the lexicon of MAGA's leader, there are some fine people in the neo nazi movement. Do not hold your breath for Bondi to take action against violence advocated by the extreme right. They are part of the red team. In the Trump regime, what is "falsely" is also subject to partisan definition. January 6 rioters were responding to what the courts have ruled is a false claim: the 2020 election was stolen. The most violent of them were freed from prison by Trump's pardons, and one who was killed in the mob actions was declared a national hero. Stay tuned.

What is behind the current wave of political and school violence?

What is behind the current wave of political and school violence? Is it a societal problem or a political one? Does society in the US condone political violence? From some learned estimates, about 20% of Americans, depending on how the question is asked. According to a PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll published in April of this year, approximately 20% of Americans believe that political violence can be justified at times.  Demagogues and aspiring influencers have appealed to that segment to rise to power and the emergence of social media has provided the newest vehicle for promotion. There is certainly a political element, but is it more?

To take a deep dive into what is causing this, I found this illuminating article:  What’s Driving Political Violence in America.  Emerging from the events of the past few days, the assassination of Charlie Kirk and a Evergreen High School shooter had in common: political extremism on social media.

The Everngreen shooter (now deceased) had spent much time on a neo Nazi website. Online footprint of Evergreen High School shooter reveals a troubling past | Watch   The Kirk killer's motivation is yet to be revealed, other than he came from a very conservative family who placed great value on gun ownership and 2nd amendment freedoms. Reported conversations with others leading up to the shooting indicated political disagreement with Charlie Kirk's positions. The accused's social media postings and often-visited websites have not been revealed, except for Discord.    Neither shooter used an "assault" weapon, but lethal weapons were nonetheless legally and easily available. These shooters would have had many more victims if these weapons or war had been used. The problem was not the type of weapons used in these two events; the problem was something else.  

The promotion of such violence by political leaders to resolve problems, no matter what media is used or by whom or what group is involved, also gives some sort of green light to the deranged to seek glory and even death.   

While the two young men involved, one 18 and the other 22,  may not have been aware of any of Trump's record, there are those on social media and in political leadership who have laid the groundwork for any degree of general societal approval of the use of violence in politics is legitimate. They reflect  this view in social media and postings by influencers that inspire wannabe political killers 

My own view:

Let us start with the top promoter of violence to achieve a political goal, the permission slip giver, the president of the United States, himself. Do not expect Trump to become the champion against political violence or take any moral leadership on this issue. He has a long record in exhorting such violence.  The record is clear and documented. Here is my tracking of Trump's dog whistles to those who commit violence on his behalf and his own exhortations of violence in public statements:  MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Documented history of Trump's call to violence 2020-June 2024

MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Trump fans the flames of violence, yet calls himself the law and order president updated 

Charlie Kirk assassination: Suspect allegedly used Discord before shooting - YouTube

The damage assassinations do to the cause of saving democracy from dictators and autocrats is profound: Political violence is what the founders of our democracy wanted to prevent. There are some sane voices rising and one deserves special recognition.Utah Governor Spencer Cox emerges as voice of reason in wake of Charlie Kirk killing - Newsweek

From my September 11 Facebook posting: The killing of Charlie Kirk was also an assassination attempt on democracy. Our country was founded during the Age of Reason, where citizens were considered capable of using their brains and reason to do what would be in the best interest of the country as a whole. Instead of violence and bloody revolution, which had plagued Europe and England to pit self-interested and religious fanatics against each other, Madison and others crafted a way to permit political discourse and debate to bring reason to political governance instead of violence and to protect even the voice of dissidents. There are always _those in any society who only see violence and hate as the way to get their way, but democracy was to formed to let the voice of rational people to be heard and the majority to be elected. Some are also deranged and so angry that they have lost reason. For those who see assassination as a tool to gain power, they are not protecting democracy, but destroying it.

Further thoughts on my Facebook posting on September 11. I realize some do not give a twit about democracy. They are so bound up by either ignorance of what the alternatives are or who feel the only way that counts is their way and seek a government who only rules on their behalf, the rest of the country and world be damned That who do not march in lock step with them and should be beaten down and suppressed using what ever means they have, including violence.. To those who think that, all I can say is what goes around comes around, and the circle of violence only expands and accelerates until there are more and more victims in the grave on both sides. There are no happy endings in history as even the victors or the governments they espoused based on hate, violence, and suppression eventually fall victim to themselves, either in suicide in a bunker or hanged by those they once suppressed. That should be the lesson we learned from the last century of world wars and revolutions, from the rise of totalitarianism (dictatorial control over governmental power and culture) to Bosnia. It may take years for this to play out, but the old saw of "those who live with the sword, die with the sword" has some truth. Democracy's greatest asset is that it provides a plan and way for humans to pursue life, liberty, and happiness without violent conflict, instead.