Charlie Kirk and the Surface-Level Thinking of Conservatism
Weaponized ignorance and misinformation
So the other day, I was scrolling through TikTok when a video of someone debating Charlie Kirk came up, and I was a little intrigued, I have to be honest. For the unaware, who’s been making a bit of a name for himself in recent times by going to different colleges and debating kids.
He’s obviously done very well at this; after all, he has garnered a fairly large platform to the point of being one of the leading voices for right-wing politics in this time, but this hasn’t come without its criticisms. Many people have spent a lot of time correcting things he’s said, and he even on his YouTube after his own fans kept pointing out he lost a debate with someone who called him out.
Back to this more recent clip though, I saw him debating a creator who’s actually responded to him a few times, known as SimpleBlackTheory on TikTok. To be blunt, Charlie didn’t come off looking too good here but he did say some things that in my opinion, really highlight how conservatives think.
Funnily enough, what actually inspired me to write this was his insistence that the person he was responding on race as the KKK because “you both talk about race all the time.” Now, it’s worth pointing out the obvious racism here, considering the person Kirk was debating is black, but his overall point here really does highlight how shallow and surface-level the way he thinks is.
For one thing, the problem with the KKK isn’t that they simply talk about race; it’s that they promote horrifically racist ideas, people because of their race. Black people who speak up against racism are not even in the same category as this, and Charlie’s insistence that they are shows how utterly uneducated he is about everything.
What he’s really getting at, though, and what ends up being a major indictment of the way he thinks, is that he doesn’t value substance at all. What I mean by this is, as stated, there is a massive qualitative difference between anti-racists and the of what they’re actually saying, but Charlie doesn’t even care about that. He simply views them both talking about race and, as a result, views them as being the same.
Again, the substance doesn’t matter, or it’s something that he just isn’t interested in/capable of dealing with. No doubt, a reason why he refuses to engage with the substance is that it would only illustrate just how much he actually agrees with the . I mean, just ask yourself the question: Do you think is closer to Charlie’s, or the person he’s debating? If we’re honest with ourselves, the answer is obvious.
Furthermore, what he’s saying just isn’t even true. Charlie talks about race all the time, usually making overtly racist statements, such as when he said his first thought upon seeing a black pilot is to question whether or not they’re qualified. This was a point he actually touched on in his debate here with SBT and it once again shows how fundamentally surface-level his thinking is.
He asked whether you would want a pilot who’s qualified or diverse, which is an absurd question based simply on the fact that all pilots are qualified. Assuming or questioning whether or not a non-white pilot is qualified is literally what racial stereotyping is. He rattles on about this like he usually does when talking about DEI.
He asked whether you would want a pilot who’s qualified or diverse, which is an absurd question based simply on the fact that all pilots are qualified
Again, this all comes back to how his thinking is fundamentally surface-level and rooted in ignorance. He doesn’t understand DEI and thinks it lowers standards when it’s literally the opposite. historically due to racism and often end up being to their white counterparts, but Charlie doesn’t even consider this.
He just sees black people as inherently less qualified, and any “DEI” initiative being about lowering standards and rather than considering the facts or looking beyond the surface, he just continues to make points that . Everything he said is disproven by even the most basic examination of reality.
During the same discussion, he made the bizarre claim that getting rid of segregation was an act of DEI. I say bizarre because it really is a case of saying the quiet part out loud. The problem with the espoused colourblindness of people like Charlie is that they refuse to engage with the facts of how prejudice actually impacts things on a societal level. I mean I’m not being funny, but if ending segregation is bad because it’s “DEI,” then I think you’re a deeply unserious person.
The fact of the matter is that racism as a historical problem still exists today, and the impact of past racist policies are still felt today across the US. Pretending like that’s not a thing and that it’s bad to try and address these things because of any three-letter phrase reactionaries are mad at this week is nothing more than the height of ignorance.
For more stories about racist influencers on social media, follow Fourth Wave. Have you got a story or poem that focuses on women or other targeted groups? Submit to the Wave!
