The Strange Afterlife of Charlie Kirk
- Within a few hours of his murder, political activist and media personality, Charlie Kirk, has attained extraordinary status as a sort of martyr for the MAGA cause.
- The reaction from the inner circles of the US administration has been couched largely in the language of violence and revenge.
- Much of this has been directed at the “radical left,” and prominent figures have vowed to bring the full power of the state to bear against both the left and its institutions.
- Given recent events, like the weaponization of DHS and the Justice Department, as well as historical precedent, this rhetoric should be taken seriously.
- Canadian NGOs, cultural institutions, charities, universities, and advocacy groups have close ties with their American counterparts, many of which are likely to be targeted by the administration.
- Canadians in the United States with any association to those organizations, including public servants, could find themselves at risk of arrest, detention, and criminal proceedings, some of which could easily move into the realm of US national security.
The Death of a Culture Hero
And the Making of a Martyr
The reaction to Kirk’s murder has been extraordinary and, in death, he has become almost as influential as he was in life. American conservatives and American liberals alike have deplored his murder, which is understandable – violence, especially violence in the name of ideology, is deplorable. But there is a performative quality to much of the “official” mourning of Kirk’s death. Far-right Republican members of the House of Representatives proposed that Kirk should lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda, an honour usually reserved for presidents and statesmen (recent honourees have included President Jimmy Carter and Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg). President Trump announced on September 11 that he would award Kirk – a podcaster, radio host, and political operative – a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom.
What is most worrisome about the fallout from Charlie Kirk’s murder, however, is the strident, even militant tone taken by prominent figures, including members of the administration, up to and including the president. Shortly after the shooting, at a time when political leaders usually call for unity and calm in the face of tragedy, President Trump cast himself as Kirk’s avenger. He laid the blame for his killing squarely on the “radical left,” which he claimed was responsible “…for the terrorism that we are seeing in our country today.” He added that “my administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence…”
Meanwhile, Kirk’s widow, Erika, echoed this in her own public statement. Addressing the “evil-doers” behind her husband’s murder, she said, “…you have no idea what you have just unleashed across this entire country and this world.” Elon Musk went on record saying, “…the Left is the party of murder.” And Vice-President J.D. Vance, hosting a “posthumous” episode of Kirk’s radio show, vowed to carry on Kirk’s legacy and to “go after” left-leaning organizations.
Ratcheting Up the Response
So far, all evidence suggests that Kirk’s alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, acted alone. But on the radio show alluded to above, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller raised the spectre of a “vast domestic terror movement” of leftist NGOs that was promoting violence in America. He did not actually name these NGOs but said that he intended to deploy all the resources of the US government, including the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, to destroy them. The vice president was more specific, naming the Ford Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations as principal targets. He also seemed to accuse The Nation, the 160-year-old voice of American progressivism, of being part of the “terror movement.” And President Trump renewed his pledge to designate Antifa as a terrorist group. Antifa is less an identifiable group than it is an umbrella term for a loose global network and a set of tactics, so it is hard to know how it would be targeted or investigated, much less prosecuted or dismantled.
The White House and the Republican Party have, for years now, deployed anti-progressive rhetoric and sporadic attacks against a range of so-called “leftist” organizations, from universities to non-compliant law firms, cultural institutions and student protestors. Critical indicators suggest that the administration and the Republican Party are about to pivot to a much more coordinated strategy of surveillance, investigation and even criminal or national security-related charges and criminal proceedings targeting a whole range of NGOs, foundations, think tanks, charities and artistic / cultural institutions. Indeed, the targeting and silencing of liberal media personalities, like Stephen Colbert and, most recently, Jimmy Kimmel, by networks whose fear of the Federal Communications Commission and its power appears to outweigh their commitment to the First Amendment, may be a harbinger of things to come.
Not For the First Time
Why Do We Care?
Many of the actual and potential targets of the administration’s incipient campaign to target “leftist” institutions are in fact pillars of American culture and society. Their diminishment will, in turn, leave America, and the world, a much-diminished place.
But the actual threat, especially for Canada, is much more immediate. Many Canadian NGOs, foundations, charitable organizations, universities, and artistic and cultural institutions have close ties to their American counterparts. In some cases, they are effectively branch operations. Canadian NGOs regularly avail themselves of the generosity of American funding bodies: since 2018, for example, the Ford Foundation has provided almost 20 large grants worth several million dollars to Canadian organizations, including anti-poverty, anti-racist, and sexual health groups. Canadian and American academics regularly confer and work in each other’s universities and research laboratories; artists and writers travel to festivals and workshops on either side of the border; NGO and charitable sector workers attend meetings and conferences. In some cases, Canadians may be directly employed by those NGOs and charities.
As the administration ratchets up pressure on specific organizations, there will be important tax and revenue considerations: the revocation of tax-exempt status of an American NGO, for example, will have significant knock-on effects for its partners and affiliates in Canada. Any Canadian deposits in US banks belonging to those partners and affiliates could be frozen, even seized. More critically, if the administration follows through on its stated intention to criminalize what appears to be an extremely broad tent of “radical left” actors and organizations, Canadians in the United States with any association to those organizations, including public servants, could find themselves at risk of arrest, detention, and criminal proceedings. And, given the apparent determination of the administration to weaponize terrorist organization designations, these criminal proceedings could easily move into the realm of national security.
This assessment is based on information current as of 1200 hours EDT, 25/09/18