Charlie Kirk and John Brown: Liberal Political Violence

The tragic events surrounding Charlie Kirk this past week have led me to reflect on history. As the saying goes, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it,” and this week we have seen a striking example of that truth.

In recent days, I have heard voices on the left openly praising the death of Charlie Kirk—while simultaneously glorifying the violent 19th-century abolitionist, John Brown. This parallel is telling. It underscores how little the general public truly understands our past or the destructive legacy of figures like Brown. Though these two historical events are separated by more than a century, both reflect a dangerous mindset: the belief that violence in pursuit of ideological goals is justified.

On the night of May 24, 1856, Captain John Brown and his small band of Yankee abolitionists descended on a settlement of Southerners at Pottawatomie Creek, Kansas. They carried with them newly sharpened swords. There they proceeded, under cover of darkness, to split the skulls and hack to death five innocent people. The first three of their victims -- James P. Doyle and his sons, twenty-two-year-old William and twenty-year-old Drury – were Catholics from Tennessee. They were never slave owners and when later asked why her husband and sons had been so brutally murdered, Mrs. Doyle replied, “Just because we were southern people, I reckon.” Drury had made an attempt to flee, which resulted in a particularly gruesome hacking, leaving his limbless body as little more than viscera. The other victims were Allen Wilkinson, who was hacked to death while his wife and children watched in horror, and William Sherman, whose mutilated body was found floating in the creek with his left hand hanging by a strand of skin, his skull split open and some of his brains washed away.

A few years later, Brown and his militant band struck again at Harper’s Ferry, where they killed six innocent individuals—the first of whom was a free Black man. What drew particular outrage, however, was not merely Brown’s backing by six prominent Northern financiers, but the fact that governors in two states used their offices to shield his men from prosecution. A Charleston Mercury editorial even referenced a fundraiser for Brown’s family, prompting Southerners to ask: was this intended to finance the next Harper’s Ferry? Ultimately, Brown was tried and publicly executed. In that act, justice was served.

At the time, this was just one event that deepened the cultural and political divide between the North and the South. Most of Brown’s victims were not slave owners; they were targeted solely because they were Southerners. It amplified the fact that Northern radicals were willing to break the law in order to achieve their objectives, employing whatever means they deemed necessary. This was shocking to Southerners—and tensions only escalated when abolitionist-backed Republicans elected Abraham Lincoln to the presidency.

Fast forward more than 170 years, and we find radical leftists praising John Brown as a hero while making statements like, “Charlie deserved it.”  The parallel is hard to miss. I have long argued that today’s radical Left are the modern heirs of the radical abolitionists movement; people who feel justified in their pursuit of violence, regardless of the law.

In a civilized, free society, we must condemn John Brown’s approach just as firmly as we condemn those who celebrate the execution of a man over his use of free speech. If your argument is that some institutions are so evil they must be opposed by any means necessary, then ask yourself: would you justify abortion opponents bombing clinics? Abortion claims far more lives than slavery ever did, yet abortion remains legal in this country. If a member of your own family were killed as an innocent bystander in such an attack, would you really shrug and say, “Well, she deserved it”? Of course not. Even those who oppose abortion would not view indiscriminate violence as a justifiable tactic.

Indiscriminate violence has long served as a favored weapon of the left, a means of advancing and entrenching their ideology. To those with eyes to see, the steady erosion of Western Christian culture is unmistakable—brought about by deliberate hands. Their systematic dismantling of God’s institutions paves the way for the very chaos and anarchy they seek, especially in the destruction of the family. By this, they clear a path toward their vision of a godless order, one where, as they promise, “you will own nothing and be happy,” and all are rendered equally dependent.