|
Killing someone to silence them can only muzzle that one individual, but it cannot gag everyone. Regrettably, the dissemination of science and truth takes time—this is particularly true for young people. Only when they move beyond their rebellious, radical, and even reckless adolescent years and attain maturity can they likely accept scientific evidence, develop rational thinking, and become logical and sensible. When no one can convince the other, all we can do is wait, and let time prove everything. On September 20, supporters paid tribute in Phoenix, Arizona, to Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed.
Charlie Kirk, a political ally of U.S. President Donald Trump, was fatally shot on September 10 while giving a speech in Utah. On the 12th, 22-year-old Taylor Robinson from Utah was identified as the suspect and arrested. Currently, Robinson faces multiple preliminary charges, including felony murder, unlawful discharge of a firearm, and obstruction of justice.
The motive behind Robinson’s shooting of Kirk remains unclear. However, his act is not only an open challenge to and violation of the values of the rule of law, civilization, and justice in modern society, but also a severe blow to the principle that “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Undoubtedly, it proves that realizing this principle—whether now or in the distant future—can only be an idealistic aspiration.
Many of Kirk’s views were regarded as typical of conservative or right-wing ideologies, though some were difficult to interpret or categorize. For instance, regarding the Russia-Ukraine war, he opposed aiding Ukraine and claimed that Volodymyr Zelenskyy was an obstacle to peace. This led some to argue that he did not always stand on the side of justice. Generally, however, his views were opposed to far-left ideologies: he rejected transgender rights, the concept of climate change, abortion rights, and illegal immigration, among other issues.
Unlike his opponents, who sought to eliminate Kirk physically, one of Kirk’s catchphrases was, “Prove me wrong.” He had the courage to move from online discourse to in-person engagements, facing those with differing opinions directly. Armed with sharp logic and basic common sense, he relished debating and confronting left-wing figures face-to-face—either challenging his opponents to prove him wrong or proving them wrong himself.
Yet, on many issues, Kirk and his opponents could hardly convince each other. Persuading others relies not only on common sense and logic, but also on rationality and scientific evidence. However, obtaining scientific or factual evidence and enabling people to fully understand it takes time. This is evident in debates surrounding transgender issues. Taylor Robinson, the suspect who shot Kirk, was a supporter of LGBTQ+ rights. The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) found that Robinson lived with a transgender partner named Lance Twiggs. Twiggs believed that those who opposed transgender rights were the “worst kind of people”—a view that undoubtedly influenced, if not represented, Robinson’s own beliefs. It was for this reason that Robinson harbored an intense hatred for Kirk and was determined to kill him—and he succeeded, even prompting some far-left individuals to celebrate.
Nevertheless, determining matters related to gender transition requires biological and genetic verification; it is primarily a matter of scientific attributes, not merely an individual’s perception, consciousness, or social identity. Gender determination is based on multiple criteria: external appearance and behavior, as well as nuclear and genetic standards (generally including chromosomes—XY for males and XX for females—and genes such as the male SRY gene); endocrine standards, including gonads and sex hormones; standards related to primary and secondary sexual characteristics, including internal and external genitalia; and psychological, behavioral, and social standards.
Under the “Wokeism” movement promoted by the U.S. Democratic Party, however, some individuals claim to be a certain gender based solely on their personal feelings and even undergo gender transition at all costs. For example, Elon Musk’s eldest son, Xavier Musk, transitioned to female based on his self-identified gender and changed his name to Vivian Wilson.
Musk was deeply distressed by his son’s transition. He stated that he was “tricked” into agreeing to let his child take puberty blockers. When his son wanted to transition, he “was basically tricked into signing the papers” and “didn’t really understand what was happening.” At the time, doctors only told him that if he prevented his son from receiving treatment, the latter might commit suicide.
In fact, it was never confirmed whether Xavier possessed female chromosomes or genes. It was only due to adolescent rebellion and potential negative experiences at school—such as bullying—that Xavier felt uncomfortable and believed life would be better as a girl, eventually requesting gender transition.
After puberty, as genes exert their true effects over the long course of life, it will be extremely difficult for Xavier to revert to his original male body, unless he undergoes further surgery. This is one of the key reasons why Musk later grew to resent the Democratic Party and switched his support to Trump.
In Kirk’s view: “The American way of life is simple. I want to get married, buy a house, have kids, let them ride their bikes until sunset, send them to good schools, live in a neighborhood with low crime, and keep my kids from learning that garbage about lesbians, gays, and transgenders in school… That matters.”
Clearly, differing views on transgender issues were among the motives behind Robinson’s desire to kill Kirk. Just like Xavier’s perception, such views lack scientific basis; instead, they rely on the fleeting rebellion of adolescence and immature thoughts to rush into gender transition. Moreover, they foster hatred toward parents who oppose such transitions and individuals who disagree with transgender ideologies—hatred that ultimately leads to violent acts.
Killing someone to silence them can only muzzle that one individual, but it cannot gag everyone. Regrettably, the dissemination of science and truth takes time—especially for young people. Only when they move past their rebellious, radical, and even reckless adolescent years and mature can they likely accept scientific evidence, develop rational thinking, and become logical and sensible.
Kirk’s death has also sparked a new round of counterattacks from conservatives. They have launched a campaign across the U.S., reporting and targeting individuals on social media who “praised” Kirk’s death, leading to the latter’s dismissal from their jobs; some foreign nationals now face visa revocation, visa denial, or deportation. This large-scale campaign of reporting, censorship, dismissal, and deportation has left people living in fear.
If the situation deteriorates further, retaliation—an eye for an eye—will become more common, even turning bloody and unbearable. Therefore, it is not only the U.S., but the entire world that needs to prioritize communication: debating with the attitude of “Prove me wrong,” rather than eliminating others physically to prove they are wrong and oneself is right. This requires not only logic and common sense, but also scientific rationality—and, above all, time.
When no one can convince the other, all we can do is wait, and let time prove everything. If one resorts to killing to silence others simply because they cannot be persuaded, it reveals that modern humans are merely cloaked in the trappings of civilization, while at their core, they remain base, barbaric, and cruel. |
