At this link:
In the weeks following the October 7 massacre, Israel initially drew widespread sympathy from across the world. Yet, that sentiment quickly faded. As criticism mounted, many Israelis were outraged at what they saw as hypocrisy: “How can we, a democracy that values human rights and free elections, be cast as the villains, while our enemies, people who execute LGBTQ individuals, are embraced as victims? Our war is your war too!” Still, Western public were not convinced. Support dwindled steadily, and among the few who remained vocal, some were hardly allies we should celebrate. One of them was Charlie Kirk.
Kirk was a fervent supporter of Israel. When news of Kirk’s death broke, many Israelis grieved. Television studios devoted full-day coverage. Social media filled with clips of him passionately defending Israel, alongside touching images of his family. The pain was real. He did not deserve to be murdered, and in a decent democratic society, no one should be killed for their views, however extreme. As John Stuart Mill argued, silencing opinions, even dangerous or mistaken ones, is an act of arrogance, as if we alone hold the truth.
But we must ask: was Kirk’s support ever truly helpful to Israel?
Most Israelis knew him only from pro-Israel clips, which earned him admiration in the country. Yet, few realized that on American campuses, in debates, and in rallies, Kirk championed views that stood in stark contradiction to the very values we claim to uphold.
Consider just a few examples: he claimed that Western culture was inherently “superior” to all others and urged audiences to stop listening to rap, a genre tied to African American communities, insisting people should return to the “music that built Western civilization.”
He once said that, if he were to find out that the pilot of the plane he was set to board was a Black man, he would inherently question his competence. He openly dismissed the very concept of empathy. He even suggested reviving public executions, joking they could be “sponsored by Coca-Cola.”
He argued that women were depressed because they pursued careers instead of submitting to their husbands and raising children. He told a gay teenager that he did not agree with his “lifestyle,” even as the boy declared support for Republicans.
When asked whethere would force his daughter to give birth if she were raped, Kirk replied yes. At a rally, when a woman introduced her child conceived through her father’s sexual abuse, Kirk applauded her decision not to have an abortion. Finally, he compared abortion to the Holocaust, stating the former is even “worse,” and used it as a rallying cry for his movement."
No comments:
Post a Comment