When Charlie Kirk was assassinated this month, it marked not the beginning of political violence in America, but the culmination of a movement that started decades ago. The roots of this crisis trace back to the classrooms of our universities, where speech was redefined, dissent demonized, and violence reframed as justice.
In the early 2000s, professors began teaching that “microaggressions” were not just rude or offensive, they were violence. This was much more than semantics; it reshaped how a generation of students understood speech. If words were violence, then violent responses to speech could be rationalized as self-defense.
By the mid-2010s, this ideology left the lecture halls and spread across campuses. Guest speakers were mobbed, shouted down, and physically attacked. Students labeled opposing ideas as “harmful.” The implication was clear: Disagreement with left-wing ideas constitutes oppression and oppression justifies retaliation.
Donald Trump’s election in 2016 was an accelerant, causing these ideas to bleed into national politics. Trump wasn’t seen simply as president to oppose; they argued that he was an illegitimate fascist to be resisted. His voters weren’t fellow citizens; they were deplorable racists. When your political opponent is fascist or racist, attacking them isn’t just permissible, it’s a moral crusade.
By the early 2020s, the definition of the word “threat” had expanded, ridiculously. Anyone challenging progressive cultural dogma, especially on gender, became fair game. Misgendering was called violence. Questioning medical procedures for minors was violence. Barring biological males from women’s sports was violence. By this warped logic, physical aggression became “self-defense.” That’s why college athletes like Riley Gaines were mobbed and parents at school board meetings were labeled “domestic terrorists.”
In 2024, the escalation turned deadly. At a Pennsylvania rally, a would-be assassin’s bullet grazed Trump’s head, killing one of his supporters. Just months later, another gunman was caught stalking Trump at his Florida golf course with a rifle. Twice in one year, the Republican candidate and former president of the United States was nearly assassinated. Political violence was no longer theoretical.
On Sept. 10, 2025, this logic culminated in the murder of Charlie Kirk, on stage in front of thousands of young people. His only crime was speaking his mind. This was not an isolated act. It was the predictable outcome of a 25-year campaign to redefine words as violence, normalize riots as resistance, and excuse assassination as politics by other means.
Media echo chambers excused left-wing violence as “mostly peaceful protests,” while magnifying every conservative misstep as a national emergency. Democrat politicians fanned the flames; President Joe Biden declared Trump and MAGA Republicans a “threat to democracy.” Millions of Americans were painted not as neighbors, but as existential enemies. That rhetoric handed moral permission to extremists to eliminate their political opponents.
If political violence was incubated in lecture halls, then the cure must begin there as well. That means dissolving the campus departments that exist only to enforce ideological conformity. We do not need several layers of humanities and social science courses to train a world-class engineer. We do not need gender studies to create the next generation of leaders. America’s colleges and universities must get back to educating and empowering the scientists, builders, and innovators that will power our future, free from political litmus tests.
It also means enhanced oversight of the accrediting agencies that have forced colleges and universities to embed left-wing ideology into degree programs. Accreditation must be about academic excellence, not political compliance.
America cannot survive if disagreement is treated as violence and violence is treated as politics. If we want to break this cycle, we must reclaim our universities, restore free inquiry, and strip away the bureaucracies that have corrupted higher education. Only then can we rebuild a culture where debate, not bloodshed, decides our future.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
Related posts:
- Why Virginia Universities Aren’t Making the Grade When It Comes to Free Speech
- UDC Claims to Champion Diversity—Then It Shut Down Our Black Panelists
- Virginia Campuses Flunk Free Speech Rankings