“Charlie Kirk has been politically violent since he stepped in the game. That man is anti-trans, anti-women, anti-black people, anti-immigrants, and then some. He has been politically violent for 10-15 years now!” 

That’s how one left-wing TikTok influencer justified the bloody assassination of MAGA superstar Charlie Kirk. They did so in a viral video that has more than 2.7 million views and has received more than 700,000 “likes.” Such sentiments are no longer fringe. Words that offend are akin to violence, and therefore, violence against those who utter these “violent” words is fair game.

Recommended Stories

• After Charlie Kirk's murder, we must draw a line
• Concealed carry is the way
• Trump's new tax cuts are a boon to small businesses

This message is not just untrue. It fundamentally threatens the fabric of American civilization. 

While the idea that words are violence may seem obviously false to anyone who has been punched in the face, it’s worth explaining why it literally is not true. By definition, violence is an action that causes bodily harm. Yes, words can cause tremendous hurt and harm. But words cannot make you bleed and see your pulse fade away, leaving your children to grow up without a parent. Words and violence are not, and never will be, the same.

People who push this lie never seem to realize that it cuts in both directions.

“Under this logic, my speech — even if sharp, brutal, and filled with invective — is still simply speech,” Greg Lukianoff explained. “Indeed, it might be commendable, righteous rage. But their speech, even if it’s similarly sharp and brutal, is violence — and I am therefore allowed to respond with violence.”

There is no coherent logical framework in which Charlie Kirk’s right-wing opinions can be construed as “violence,” but various left-wing opinions cannot be similarly classified in the minds of their opponents. Whether it’s advocating to preserve abortion access (“your words are killing babies!”) or advocating lax immigration policies (“you’re letting murderers into our country!”), the same tortured “logic” could easily be used to justify the murder of any progressive pundit whom these Charlie Kirk haters adore.

Either we live in a civilized society, or we don’t. Either we settle our differences with ballots and arguments, or with bullets and bloodshed. 

SUSPECT IN CHARLIE KIRK ASSASSINATION IS IN CUSTODY: TRUMP

As Kirk himself said, “When people stop talking, that’s when you get violence, that is when civil war happens.”

So, the justification being put forward to defend Charlie Kirk’s murder isn’t just outrageous, insensitive, and grotesque in its own right. If widely adopted, the underlying sentiment that “words are violence” could quite literally destroy the fabric of our civilization — and eventually result in civil war. 

Brad Polumbo is an independent journalist and host of the Brad vs Everyone podcast.