The Irony of the Aftermath: Charlie Kirk’s Death and the Right’s Convenient Amnesia
They called it a tragedy. They called it an attack on free speech. They called him a martyr.
But what they didn’t call out—what they won’t admit—is the hypocrisy bleeding through every tribute, every cancellation, every moment of silence demanded in his name.
Now, in the wake of his assassination, the same crowd that claimed to hate cancel culture is wielding his death like a cudgel. Teachers fired. Students expelled. Journalists dismissed. All for expressing discomfort, critique, or even dark humor in response to Kirk’s legacy. The irony is suffocating.
For years, the right decried cancel culture as a leftist plague. They mocked safe spaces, ridiculed trigger warnings, and painted themselves as the last defenders of free expression. Charlie Kirk was their poster boy—loud, unfiltered, and allegedly pro-speech. But let’s not forget: Kirk built his brand by silencing dissent, doxxing students, and platforming voices that buried others. His version of “free speech” was always conditional. Always curated.
This isn’t new. The right has long canceled voices they found inconvenient. But Kirk’s death has become a catalyst—a convenient excuse to escalate the purge. And it’s not just about grief. It’s about control. About narrative. About power.
Candace Owens, once Kirk’s closest ally, now spins conspiracy theories about Israel and billionaire interventions. Her grief is loud, messy, and politically charged. And while her claims may be reckless, they point to something deeper: the machinery behind the mourning. The corporate elite, the donors, the gatekeepers of acceptable speech. They’re not mourning Kirk—they’re leveraging him. But she’s not alone.
Max Blumenthal enters from a different angle. Less emotional, more surgical. In recent commentary, he’s dissected Kirk’s late-stage skepticism toward Israel and the pro-Israel lobby—suggesting that Kirk’s shift made him a liability to the very forces that once propped him up. Blumenthal doesn’t mourn. He autopsies. Not the body, but the narrative. He names the donors. The ideological brokers. The way Kirk’s death is being used to silence dissent, enforce loyalty, and rewrite history in real time.
So yes, Owens grieves. Blumenthal dissects. And the rest of us watch as the machinery turns—leveraging death into discipline, legacy into leverage.
Was the shooter a patsy? Maybe. Maybe not. But the aftermath feels orchestrated. The silence demanded. The expulsions enforced. The tributes choreographed. It’s all too convenient. Not for Israel, necessarily—but for the power brokers who benefit from a sanitized legacy and a silenced opposition.
This isn’t about Charlie Kirk. It’s about the architecture of control.
And if you speak out against it, you might be next.
Sources:
Truth, untruths and consequences in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s murder
Celebratory, dismissive reactions to Charlie Kirk’s death putting educators under scrutiny
Why Candace Owens is trending in the aftermath of ‘best friend’ Charlie Kirk’s death
Charlie Kirk’s Pastor Hammers Candace Owens for Spreading Conspiracy Theories
Max Blumenthal EXPOSES Charlie Kirk’s Turn Against Israel Before His Assassination
Israel, Charlie Kirk, and the Weaponization of Murder (w/ Max Blumenthal) | The Chris Hedges Report
Tragic Loss: Reactions to Charlie Kirk’s Death | Tim’s Take on Public Sentiment
Trump Backs AG Bondi’s Assertion that Hate Speech Is Not Protected Speech
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 
You must be logged in to post a comment.