A dark and malignant sickness has taken root in our public discourse. It is a poison that celebrates murder and justifies political violence. This venom was on full, repulsive display in a piece by Taylor Noakes in Cult MTL magazine, who marked the assassination of American conservative activist Charlie Kirk not with sorrow or a call for peace, but with a twisted, hate-filled celebration.Noakes article “To Hell With Charlie Kirk” is a despicable work. It represents the very worst of what modern political debate has become. He wrote, “There’s no excuse for political violence, but it’s hard to be sympathetic for someone who profited off hate.” This is not journalism. This is not commentary. This is the rationalization of a murderer’s bullet..EDITORIAL: Manitoba minister’s hate-fuelled comments on Charlie Kirk’s assassination show she’s unfit for office.Let’s examine this repugnant logic. Noakes admits there is “no excuse” for violence, but then immediately provides one. He argues that because he deemed Kirk’s opinions “hateful,” sympathy for his murder is not required. This is the same moral reasoning used by every tyrant and extremist throughout history. Our opponents are so evil that they are not just wrong, they are subhuman. They are beyond the protection of society’s most basic rules.Noakes claims Kirk “died as he lived: propagating hateful myths.” This is a lie. Charlie Kirk died as a victim of a premeditated assassination. He was murdered for his ideas. The moment we, as a society, accept that some ideas are so offensive they justify violence is the moment we abandon civilization itself. There is no coming back from that brink..The author’s attempt to distance the political left from violence is laughably false. He claims political violence in America is “almost exclusively the realm of the political right.” This is a fantasy. We have seen violent left-wing activism with our own eyes. The so-called anti-fascist movement has been identified by law enforcement as a source of violence. The destruction and riots that scarred American cities during some protests were not acts of peaceful debate. Violence is a tool of the desperate and the unhinged, not one political side.Most chilling is Noakes’ conclusion, “You reap what you sow.” This is a direct threat. It is a message to anyone who holds a conservative opinion, whether on gender ideology, government spending, or immigration. If you speak out, you are sowing the seeds of your own destruction. This is not hyperbole. It is the clear meaning of his words. He is telling his readers that those they disagree with deserve what they get.This is not how Canadians debate. This is not how free people settle differences. In a country that values freedom, we counter bad speech with better speech. We counter ideas we hate with persuasion, not violence. The right to speak freely, to disagree passionately, is the bedrock of our democracy. When that right is defended by the barrel of a gun, we all lose..THOMSON: Is it time to reconsider the death penalty?.The editors who published this filth have a responsibility. They have provided a platform for hatred. They have given a megaphone to someone who would see their political opponents gunned down in the street and then write a gloating epitaph. This is a moral failure of the highest order.We must all stand against this. We must condemn this rhetoric without reservation. There can be no ambiguity. There can be no quarter given to those who would celebrate the murder of a political opponent. The path Noakes advocates leads only to darkness, chaos, and the end of the very freedoms he hypocritically claims to defend. Canada must be better than this.
