The unexpected assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University has not silenced the campus free speech debate. It has done the opposite rather, by igniting it. Some people like Utah Valley student Scott Sperry, believe the act will galvanize Kirk’s followers and strengthen his movementbit for others, the shooting has forced a profound question in them:
‘In an era of intense political polarization and increasing violence, can our universities remain the true “marketplaces of ideas” they are meant to be, or will they become battlegrounds where rhetoric is met with bullets?’
The ugly truth, for now, is that the balance has been sadly tipped toward danger.
Some news articles have portrayed Kirk as a martyr for free speech but they’ve overlooked the fact that Kirk did not engage in the kind of respectful, civil debate that has historically defined campus intellectual life. His confrontational “Prove Me Wrong” style and use of “click-bait” viral videos turned every discussion into a performance designed to provoke and antagonize.
This is not to say he deserved to be shot —absolutely no one does— but his death has put to limelight, the deeply corrosive trend in American political dialogue. Instead of looking for a common ground, his events treated political opponents as enemies to be humiliated.
The fact that students from both sides of the aisle are now radicalizing and using his death as a rallying cry shows that the violence did not end with the single shot because it has now infected the very spirit of debate on campus.
What Happens Now?
To prevent the Charlie Kirk assassination from permanently damaging the future of free speech on college campuses, universities must first of all, actively recommit to their role as intellectual sanctuaries.
While providing robust security for all speakers is much needed, university administrators also must not be intimidated into shutting down controversial events. As experts from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) have noted, the solution isn’t to curb speech but to make more.
Additionally, a cultural change is desperately needed. College campuses should not be places where students are afraid to speak their minds. A recent report from FIRE found that student acceptance of violence in response to speech is at a record high, with 1 in 3 students believing it is at least sometimes acceptable to use violence to stop a speaker. Students need to be taught on how to engage in genuine dialogue rather than performative debate. This means teaching them how to listen to understand, not just to respond, and how to respectfully disagree without resorting to ad hominem attacks.
