Charlie Kirk Is Dead. And Some Are Cheering—What Does That Say About Us?

Charlie Kirk, the conservative firebrand who built his legacy on polarising youth politics and anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, was shot dead mid-sentence at a university event in Utah. For some, his death is a tragedy—a young father silenced by political violence. 

Charlie Kirk

For others, it’s a moment of grim satisfaction, a karmic twist in the tale of a man who made a career out of stoking division. Social media lit up with tributes from celebrities and politicians, but also with disturbing glee from corners of the internet that saw his demise as poetic justice. Is this what activism has become—a bloodsport?

Let’s be clear: celebrating a man’s death, no matter how controversial his views, is a dangerous descent into moral decay. Kirk’s legacy is riddled with harm—he platformed transphobia, spread disinformation, and aligned with far-right groups. 

SHOP NOW

But to revel in his assassination is to mirror the very violence many claim to oppose. UFC fighter Sean Strickland’s reaction—gleeful, unfiltered, and sociopathic—was a chilling reflection of how desensitised we’ve become. When death becomes entertainment, we lose more than a man—we lose our humanity.

Charlie Kirk and President Donald Trump

Yet the discomfort remains. Can we mourn a man without endorsing his message? Can we condemn violence while still acknowledging the pain he caused? 

SHOP NOW

Charlie Kirk’s death is not just a headline—it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is a society grappling with rage, grief, and the blurred line between justice and vengeance. So we ask: Is it ever okay to feel relief when the villain dies? Or does that make us villains too?

📣 Share this story from ALL ANGLES UK: