We must use this moment to fight for lasting change, especially by changing the culture of higher education.

I met Charlie Kirk only once. In September 2024, he brought the “You’re Being Brainwashed” tour to the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Being a naïve college sophomore, I took the opportunity to debate with him. Though I was already conservative, I believed that Turning Point was doing more harm than good for the right and specifically thought its outreach to young people was not working. We had a respectful conversation, and I was proven thoroughly wrong a few months later when my generation swung to the Republican Party in the general election. This was certainly due, at least in part, to what Kirk had built.

In just over a decade, Charlie Kirk launched a movement, establishing Turning Point USA as a force to be reckoned with and a presence on thousands of high school and college campuses. The response to his assassination proves that he was not just another influencer, podcast host, or provocateur. Instead, he was one of the most important living political activists of any ideology or background, and his legacy will be carried on by the millions he persuaded.

Starting when he was just a teenager, Kirk recognized the disconnect between Republican messaging and young people. He believed that conservatives needed to do more to reach college students and that reforming higher education was a step toward national renewal. While Kirk certainly was not the first conservative to acknowledge the toxicity of campus culture, he was the most effective in the fight against it. That is why everyone on the right, from George Will to JD Vance, has paid tribute to him, and even Democratic politicians felt it was necessary to comment on his assassination.

Unfortunately, the visceral reaction to Kirk’s murder among many progressives also proved his significance as a cultural figure. Though Kirk never held elected office, his platform was so large that some viewed his speech as a form of violence. This was especially true in academia. At Clemson University, one professor was fired and two others were removed from teaching duties for posts mocking his death. The University of Arkansas suspended a law professor for writing, “I will not pull back from CELEBRATING that an evil man died.” A DEI administrator at the University of California-Los Angeles was similarly placed on leave.

I have witnessed this trend firsthand. In Madison, multiple chalk messages were written near campus celebrating the assassination. A video posted by the Badger Herald, a student newspaper, included interviews with a man who said he could “dance in the street” after Kirk’s murder and a woman who said Kirk “should be happy that he got shot.”

Several UW-Madison faculty members took to Bluesky to smear Kirk with pejoratives and insults. One called him a “racist, misogynist, & Christian nationalist,” while another shared a post that said “this is class solidarity.” At the very least, this behavior is unprofessional from authority figures, and at its worst, it proves active hatred. The fact that professors felt it was reasonable to make these comments and were then surprised by the backlash shows that they operate in an entirely different reality than most Americans.

Kirk’s assassination had the consequence of proving that he was exactly right about the decaying state of higher education. Right-leaning students already feared social and academic retribution for expressing their views, and these social media posts prove that many professors are activists disguised as scholars. How could a conservative openly engage in a course taught by someone who thinks he is a bigot? Even more jarring, conservative students have reason to believe that those celebrating Kirk’s death would just as quickly celebrate theirs.

Despite this, it seems that the tragedy has energized conservative activists on college campuses like never before. The first UW-Madison College Republicans meeting of the semester was the largest event in years. TPUSA chapter requests are skyrocketing nationwide, and multiple right-wing pundits have announced their intentions to tour more college campuses. If the assassin sought to silence conservatives, it is the responsibility of conservatives to ensure he failed.

Kirk was an omnipresent force on our social media feeds and on campus, and he was the first political hero many of us had. A considerable number of young people are on the right because of Charlie Kirk. The bullet that pierced his neck lit a fire under every student who ever lied to get a good grade, who had been told his faith was offensive, or who wanted the economic opportunity afforded to his parents. Kirk died engaging in civil dialogue, just as he had done with me last year. His killer reminded me, and so many of my peers, why we must fight for what we believe.

That bullet did not kill Kirk’s movement — it made it stronger than ever before. We must use this moment to fight for lasting change, especially by changing the culture of higher education. Kirk has become a martyr for Gen Z conservatives, and the institutions he built will continue to shape our future. While Kirk may never see the outcome of his revolution in this life, it is our responsibility to finish what he started. The most important part of Charlie Kirk’s legacy will be the people he inspired. Today, you can count me as one of them.