I started following Charlie Kirk in 2018 at the age of 16. I was just getting into politics. Charlie was smart, articulate and fearless in defending what he believed. At a time when it was unpopular to be a young conservative, here was a guy close to my age standing up and being bold, rational, clear and positive. First and foremost, Charlie taught me that being a young conservative was OK, and I didn’t need to be afraid to stand up for my values.
Despite what others tell you, Charlie wasn’t radical in his beliefs. He was very pro-capitalism, pro-family and pro-America. He educated students — like myself — about the benefits of free markets, the importance of family, the merits of the Constitution and the blessings of faith. Charlie made being conservative seem “punk rock.” He deserves a lot of credit for kick-starting the Gen-Z backlash to the growing popularity of Marxism, nihilism, atheism, anti-Americanism and hyperindividualism.
Charlie was the founder of Turning Point USA, and when I was 17, I helped start a chapter at my high school. TPUSA gave me an amazing opportunity to learn — including by mistakes — how to lead, communicate and influence. Through TPUSA, I got the chance to test my beliefs. It was a crucial training ground for my young mind. It gave me the opportunity to experience opposition and refine my skills. I owe all of those incredibly important experiences to Charlie’s amazing ability to organize.
Charlie never finished college, but he spent much of his career visiting college campuses and engaging in respectful, open debate with students, and then posting these debates (unedited) to the internet. In this, Charlie was an excellent example of peacemaking. He sought dialogue and to promote values through honest discourse and discussion. He believed that he could change hearts and minds with words and ideas. To me, Charlie is a symbol, a young man taking the old-school approach to politics: talking with people face to face.
That’s why Charlie’s death is such a tragedy. It’s an attack on free speech and open debate. He was frequently protested. Universities and students tried to cancel him. But it took an assassin’s bullet to end Charlie’s attempt to meet young people where they were and engage with them in good faith. His death represents the poisonous idea — growing more prevalent — that we are unable to overcome our differences through discussion and debate. We can’t let that be the last word.
Some say it was a bad idea in the first place for Charlie to go campus to campus engaging in dialogue. Some will say that his tactics created more contention and controversy in an already divided country. These people are learning the wrong lesson from Charlie’s life.
He lived loudly, and now he’s been silenced by a ringing shot. But more loudness, not silence, is how we should respond. If we want to honor Charlie’s legacy and continue his work to heal our divided country, we need to be loud, regardless of our opinion. We need to talk. We need to listen. We need to engage in dialogue. And Charlie showed us that it’s OK if that dialogue is passionate and heated. Heated debate has more healing power than being silent ourselves or deaf to others.
To me, Charlie Kirk is an example of how to spread positive change — with boldness, intelligence and a determined smile. His impact was extraordinary. I, my generation and our entire country are indebted to him.