Death
doesn’t make one a hero if they lived a life promoting hate and
Canada’s MPs must understand this, and apologize their lack of judgment.
By Fareed Khan
A version of this article can be found on Substack.
In
the halls of Canada’s House of Commons, where the nation's leaders are supposed
to embody values that represent Canada—inclusivity, equality, and common
decency—something profoundly disturbing unfolded on September 15, 2025. On that
day Conservative Member of Parliament Rachel Thomas rose during
the Member's Statements segment to deliver a tribute to recently assassinated
American right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk. Thomas described Kirk as an
"advocate for freedom," urging her colleagues to "join our
hearts with Charlie’s family" and stand against political violence while
championing "faith, family, and freedom."
What followed was a standing ovation—not just from the
Conservatives, but from Liberal MPs as well. This wasn't a mere moment
of bipartisan unity against violence. It was a collective endorsement of
a man whose life was defined by the propagation of fascist, racist,
bigoted, and misogynistic ideologies. Kirk was the founder of Turning Point USA
(TPUSA), an organization that promoted a far right agenda, and he was
no hero of free speech. He was a purveyor of hate who built a multi
million-dollar empire by stoking division, aligning with white
supremacists, and cheering on the authoritarian agenda of Donald Trump.
The Conservatives' affinity and applause for Kirk might be expected, given their party's recent history of cozying up to far-right extremists—from supporting Canadians who spoke positively about the January 6 insurrection in Washington DC to embracing conspiracy theorists. But why on earth would the Liberals, the self-proclaimed guardians of progressive values in Canada, join in? What was Mark Carney thinking? Did they not know the hate fuelled history of Charlie Kirk?
This incident reveals a dangerous erosion of judgment, where the Liberals appear to have lost their common sense in how to deal with racists and bigots. To understand the outrage in response to the standing ovation, one must first grasp who Charlie Kirk really was. Far from the sanitized portrait painted by Thomas and his Republican fans in the US, Kirk was a loathsome human being whose words incited harm and division. His assassination on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University, was without doubt a tragic act of political violence and a capital crime that no one should condone. Yet, as one critic aptly put it, "the murder of Charlie Kirk doesn't make him a hero in death when he contributed to so much evil with his words in life." Kirk's legacy is one of toxicity, and honouring him in Canada's Parliament only serves to normalize the very hate he peddled.
Kirk's hateful messaging was relentless and multifaceted, often cloaked in the guise of conservatism but veering deep into white supremacist territory. He repeatedly espoused the "Great Replacement" theory, a conspiracy narrative popular among far-right extremists that claims non-white immigrants are deliberately displacing white populations. On the Charlie Kirk Show on March 1, 2024, he said, “The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day at our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.”
In August 2025, during one of his podcasts, Kirk commenting on immigration, declared that, "America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that." This wasn't abstract policy talk. It was a dog whistle to racists, implying that America's "greatness" depended on racial homogeneity dominated by people who are white.
He went further on Indian immigrants, stating on his podcast, "America does not need more visas for people from India. Perhaps no form of legal immigration has so displaced American workers as those from India. Enough already." Such rhetoric directly fuelled hate against South Asians, echoing the historic scapegoating of Jews, which led to violence against that community in the past and South Asian communities now.
Not surprisingly Kirk's racism also extended to Black Americans, whom he demeaned in profoundly offensive ways. He claimed that Black people were "better" in the 1940s—before the Civil Rights Act—because they "committed less crimes," conveniently ignoring the era's rampant racism, segregation, lynchings, and systemic oppression. This wasn't a slip of the tongue. It was a deliberate interpretation of American history to undermine the civil rights gains that Black Americans had fought and died for. In fact, Kirk openly called the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act "a huge mistake."
Speaking at TPUSA’s Americafest in December 2023, he said, "I have a very, very radical view on this, but I can defend it, and I’ve thought about it. We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the mid-1960s." He even labelled the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. as "awful" and "not a good person." These statements weren't fringe opinions, they were broadcast to millions through his podcast, social media, and TPUSA events, directly challenging the foundational principles of equality that Canada and the US claim to uphold.
His bigotry didn't stop at race. Kirk was a virulent misogynist who opposed women's autonomy in the harshest terms. Responding to a hypothetical question about a 10-year-old rape victim and abortion, he infamously responded by insisting, "The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered . . . Wouldn't it be a better story to say something evil happened and we do something good in the face of evil?" This callous dismissal of trauma reduced women to mere vessels for his ideological agenda, ignoring the devastating impacts on survivors of sexual violence. Kirk's TPUSA actively discouraged women from pursuing education or careers, promoting instead their "natural" role as wives and mothers—a regressive, patriarchal view that aligns with fascist notions of gender hierarchy. In a society already grappling with gender-based violence, Kirk's words normalized misogyny, making it harder for women to demand equality.
He also rejected empathy outright. In a 2022 episode of his podcast, he declared, “I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that—it does a lot of damage.” He argued that true empathy—feeling others' pain—weakens resolve against political foes. This rejection of basic human connection was no slip up. It permeated his worldview and the politics he promoted.
Members of the LGBTQ+ community were also painted with a target by Kirk through his homophobic and transphobic messaging. He spread baseless propaganda about transgender people, claiming an "epidemic of trans shooters" in the wake of events like the 2023 Nashville school shooting. Kirk opposed same-sex marriage and transgender rights, praising Trump's revocation of policies allowing trans people to serve openly in the military. His rhetoric framed LGBTQ+ individuals as threats to "Judeo-Christian civilization," a phrase he frequently used to justify discrimination.
At TPUSA events, speakers and attendees often spewed homophobic and transphobic slurs, with Kirk providing the platform. This wasn't harmless debate. It contributed to a climate where LGBTQ+ youth face higher rates of suicide and violence, all while Kirk benefited financially from the fear he sowed.
Kirk's fascist leanings were evident in his admiration for Trump’s authoritarianism and his associations with white supremacists. As a key ally of the president, he played a "critical role" in mobilizing young voters for the 2024 election through his "You're Being Brainwashed" campus tour, which garnered millions of views on social media. He was deeply involved in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a blueprint for a second Trump term that advocates dismantling democratic institutions, imposing Christian nationalism, and expanding executive power—all hallmarks of fascism, and echoing actions taken by the Nazis in 1930s Germany.
Kirk endorsed Trump's dehumanizing language, calling Democrats "everything that God hates" and blaming Jews for funding "anti-whiteness" and "Cultural Marxism." He even claimed, "Jews control . . . the colleges, the nonprofits, the movies, Hollywood, all of it," a classic antisemitic narrative. Additionally, TPUSA events attracted neo-Nazis and far-right extremists, including members of the Rise Above Movement and Blood Tribe. Kirk also platformed conspiracy theorists and alt-right figures on his platforms, creating a "vast platform for extremists." Even after a public backlash, he refused to fully disavow them, once tweeting, "Whiteness is great," in a nod to white nationalists.
Islamophobia was another hateful ideology that Kirk seemed to promote with gusto, as he repeatedly demonized Muslims, inciting fear among Muslim Americans. In a June 2025 podcast, and on social media he claimed, “Islam is not compatible with Western civilization,” asserting that Muslim immigrants threaten American values. At a TPUSA event in 2023, he falsely linked Islam to terrorism, stating, “You can’t ignore the data—most terrorist attacks come from radical Islam.” In a social media post days before he was assassinated he said, “Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.” These remarks fuelled anti-Muslim hate and echoed far-right narratives that painted all Muslims as inherently dangerous.
And while extremist groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys viewed Kirk as an enemy for not being sufficiently racist, they have exploited his death to call for "civil war" in response to his murder. Kirk's organization made it a practice of sowing fear of immigrants, LGBTQ+ people, Muslims, Jews, racial justice advocates, etc. as threats to "white Christian America," directly aligning with the narratives of white supremacist ideology.
Perhaps most galling for Canadians was Kirk's hostility towards this country. He praised Trump's stated desire to annex Canada, cheering the idea of absorbing our country into the US as a way to “help” us escape the direction that the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was taking this country. In one viral clip, Kirk mocked Canadian life, saying, "I would deport Justin Trudeau. That guy sucks," and suggested annexation would save Canadians from socialism. This wasn't humourous banter or kidding around. This was a clear threat to Canadian sovereignty, and yet MPs gave Kirk a standing ovation anyway.
The Conservatives’ embrace of Charlie Kirk and his ideology aligns with their troubling pattern of tolerating far-right extremism, from downplaying the antisemitic and Islamophobic elements of the “Freedom Convoy” to platforming controversial figures. Pierre Poilievre calling Kirk a “martyr for simply expressing his views” is unsurprising given this, despite Kirk’s hateful and dangerous rhetoric.
Yet, the Liberals’ decision to join the standing ovation for Kirk, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney, who has positioned his party as a bulwark against Trumpism, is shocking. By applauding him they signalled that honouring purveyors of hate is now a bipartisan matter, implying racists deserve praise in death despite the harm they did in life. As journalist Rachel Gilmore aptly stated, “You can oppose political violence without doing all this.”
Condemning political violence is essential, but using Kirk as a symbol of this message is a grave misstep. He energized hateful elements in society, incited division, and profited from it to the tune of millions of dollars. So why should he be honoured in any way, let alone in Canada’s House of Commons. If the Conservatives and Liberals wanted an example of an incident that they could use to highlight political violence in Canada then all they had to do was look to the École Polytechnique massacre or the convoy protests in 2022, where Ottawa residents were subjected to violence, and the Alberta border blockade, which occurred at the same time, where a plan to violently attack the RCMP was foiled. Both of those events offered stark lessons.
By honouring Kirk MPs have emboldened Canadian far-right groups to target critics. The Liberals’ failure to reject Kirk’s legacy suggests a dangerous willingness to appease extremist elements, which could result in political violence in Canada.
Reverend Howard-John Wesley, a Baptist minister at a church in Virginia captured Kirk’s life best in his viral sermon when he said, “Charlie Kirk did not deserve to be assassinated. But I'm overwhelmed seeing the flags of the United States of America at half-staff, calling this nation to honour and venerate a man who was an unapologetic racist and spent all of his life sowing seeds of division and hate into this land."
Death doesn’t make one a hero if they lived a life promoting hate and Canada’s MPs must understand this and apologize for their lack of judgment. Canadians deserve leaders who unequivocally reject such figures, not ones who betray our values of pluralism and diversity by applauding them. Members of Parliament, especially Liberals, must reflect deeply on their recent actions to avoid eroding our democracy further by honouring the wrong person to make the right point.
© 2025 The View From Here. © 2025 Fareed Khan. All Rights Reserved.
The Conservatives' affinity and applause for Kirk might be expected, given their party's recent history of cozying up to far-right extremists—from supporting Canadians who spoke positively about the January 6 insurrection in Washington DC to embracing conspiracy theorists. But why on earth would the Liberals, the self-proclaimed guardians of progressive values in Canada, join in? What was Mark Carney thinking? Did they not know the hate fuelled history of Charlie Kirk?
This incident reveals a dangerous erosion of judgment, where the Liberals appear to have lost their common sense in how to deal with racists and bigots. To understand the outrage in response to the standing ovation, one must first grasp who Charlie Kirk really was. Far from the sanitized portrait painted by Thomas and his Republican fans in the US, Kirk was a loathsome human being whose words incited harm and division. His assassination on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University, was without doubt a tragic act of political violence and a capital crime that no one should condone. Yet, as one critic aptly put it, "the murder of Charlie Kirk doesn't make him a hero in death when he contributed to so much evil with his words in life." Kirk's legacy is one of toxicity, and honouring him in Canada's Parliament only serves to normalize the very hate he peddled.
Kirk's hateful messaging was relentless and multifaceted, often cloaked in the guise of conservatism but veering deep into white supremacist territory. He repeatedly espoused the "Great Replacement" theory, a conspiracy narrative popular among far-right extremists that claims non-white immigrants are deliberately displacing white populations. On the Charlie Kirk Show on March 1, 2024, he said, “The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day at our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.”
In August 2025, during one of his podcasts, Kirk commenting on immigration, declared that, "America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that." This wasn't abstract policy talk. It was a dog whistle to racists, implying that America's "greatness" depended on racial homogeneity dominated by people who are white.
He went further on Indian immigrants, stating on his podcast, "America does not need more visas for people from India. Perhaps no form of legal immigration has so displaced American workers as those from India. Enough already." Such rhetoric directly fuelled hate against South Asians, echoing the historic scapegoating of Jews, which led to violence against that community in the past and South Asian communities now.
Not surprisingly Kirk's racism also extended to Black Americans, whom he demeaned in profoundly offensive ways. He claimed that Black people were "better" in the 1940s—before the Civil Rights Act—because they "committed less crimes," conveniently ignoring the era's rampant racism, segregation, lynchings, and systemic oppression. This wasn't a slip of the tongue. It was a deliberate interpretation of American history to undermine the civil rights gains that Black Americans had fought and died for. In fact, Kirk openly called the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act "a huge mistake."
Speaking at TPUSA’s Americafest in December 2023, he said, "I have a very, very radical view on this, but I can defend it, and I’ve thought about it. We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the mid-1960s." He even labelled the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. as "awful" and "not a good person." These statements weren't fringe opinions, they were broadcast to millions through his podcast, social media, and TPUSA events, directly challenging the foundational principles of equality that Canada and the US claim to uphold.
His bigotry didn't stop at race. Kirk was a virulent misogynist who opposed women's autonomy in the harshest terms. Responding to a hypothetical question about a 10-year-old rape victim and abortion, he infamously responded by insisting, "The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered . . . Wouldn't it be a better story to say something evil happened and we do something good in the face of evil?" This callous dismissal of trauma reduced women to mere vessels for his ideological agenda, ignoring the devastating impacts on survivors of sexual violence. Kirk's TPUSA actively discouraged women from pursuing education or careers, promoting instead their "natural" role as wives and mothers—a regressive, patriarchal view that aligns with fascist notions of gender hierarchy. In a society already grappling with gender-based violence, Kirk's words normalized misogyny, making it harder for women to demand equality.
He also rejected empathy outright. In a 2022 episode of his podcast, he declared, “I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that—it does a lot of damage.” He argued that true empathy—feeling others' pain—weakens resolve against political foes. This rejection of basic human connection was no slip up. It permeated his worldview and the politics he promoted.
Members of the LGBTQ+ community were also painted with a target by Kirk through his homophobic and transphobic messaging. He spread baseless propaganda about transgender people, claiming an "epidemic of trans shooters" in the wake of events like the 2023 Nashville school shooting. Kirk opposed same-sex marriage and transgender rights, praising Trump's revocation of policies allowing trans people to serve openly in the military. His rhetoric framed LGBTQ+ individuals as threats to "Judeo-Christian civilization," a phrase he frequently used to justify discrimination.
At TPUSA events, speakers and attendees often spewed homophobic and transphobic slurs, with Kirk providing the platform. This wasn't harmless debate. It contributed to a climate where LGBTQ+ youth face higher rates of suicide and violence, all while Kirk benefited financially from the fear he sowed.
Kirk's fascist leanings were evident in his admiration for Trump’s authoritarianism and his associations with white supremacists. As a key ally of the president, he played a "critical role" in mobilizing young voters for the 2024 election through his "You're Being Brainwashed" campus tour, which garnered millions of views on social media. He was deeply involved in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a blueprint for a second Trump term that advocates dismantling democratic institutions, imposing Christian nationalism, and expanding executive power—all hallmarks of fascism, and echoing actions taken by the Nazis in 1930s Germany.
Kirk endorsed Trump's dehumanizing language, calling Democrats "everything that God hates" and blaming Jews for funding "anti-whiteness" and "Cultural Marxism." He even claimed, "Jews control . . . the colleges, the nonprofits, the movies, Hollywood, all of it," a classic antisemitic narrative. Additionally, TPUSA events attracted neo-Nazis and far-right extremists, including members of the Rise Above Movement and Blood Tribe. Kirk also platformed conspiracy theorists and alt-right figures on his platforms, creating a "vast platform for extremists." Even after a public backlash, he refused to fully disavow them, once tweeting, "Whiteness is great," in a nod to white nationalists.
Islamophobia was another hateful ideology that Kirk seemed to promote with gusto, as he repeatedly demonized Muslims, inciting fear among Muslim Americans. In a June 2025 podcast, and on social media he claimed, “Islam is not compatible with Western civilization,” asserting that Muslim immigrants threaten American values. At a TPUSA event in 2023, he falsely linked Islam to terrorism, stating, “You can’t ignore the data—most terrorist attacks come from radical Islam.” In a social media post days before he was assassinated he said, “Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.” These remarks fuelled anti-Muslim hate and echoed far-right narratives that painted all Muslims as inherently dangerous.
And while extremist groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys viewed Kirk as an enemy for not being sufficiently racist, they have exploited his death to call for "civil war" in response to his murder. Kirk's organization made it a practice of sowing fear of immigrants, LGBTQ+ people, Muslims, Jews, racial justice advocates, etc. as threats to "white Christian America," directly aligning with the narratives of white supremacist ideology.
Perhaps most galling for Canadians was Kirk's hostility towards this country. He praised Trump's stated desire to annex Canada, cheering the idea of absorbing our country into the US as a way to “help” us escape the direction that the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was taking this country. In one viral clip, Kirk mocked Canadian life, saying, "I would deport Justin Trudeau. That guy sucks," and suggested annexation would save Canadians from socialism. This wasn't humourous banter or kidding around. This was a clear threat to Canadian sovereignty, and yet MPs gave Kirk a standing ovation anyway.
The Conservatives’ embrace of Charlie Kirk and his ideology aligns with their troubling pattern of tolerating far-right extremism, from downplaying the antisemitic and Islamophobic elements of the “Freedom Convoy” to platforming controversial figures. Pierre Poilievre calling Kirk a “martyr for simply expressing his views” is unsurprising given this, despite Kirk’s hateful and dangerous rhetoric.
Yet, the Liberals’ decision to join the standing ovation for Kirk, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney, who has positioned his party as a bulwark against Trumpism, is shocking. By applauding him they signalled that honouring purveyors of hate is now a bipartisan matter, implying racists deserve praise in death despite the harm they did in life. As journalist Rachel Gilmore aptly stated, “You can oppose political violence without doing all this.”
Condemning political violence is essential, but using Kirk as a symbol of this message is a grave misstep. He energized hateful elements in society, incited division, and profited from it to the tune of millions of dollars. So why should he be honoured in any way, let alone in Canada’s House of Commons. If the Conservatives and Liberals wanted an example of an incident that they could use to highlight political violence in Canada then all they had to do was look to the École Polytechnique massacre or the convoy protests in 2022, where Ottawa residents were subjected to violence, and the Alberta border blockade, which occurred at the same time, where a plan to violently attack the RCMP was foiled. Both of those events offered stark lessons.
By honouring Kirk MPs have emboldened Canadian far-right groups to target critics. The Liberals’ failure to reject Kirk’s legacy suggests a dangerous willingness to appease extremist elements, which could result in political violence in Canada.
Reverend Howard-John Wesley, a Baptist minister at a church in Virginia captured Kirk’s life best in his viral sermon when he said, “Charlie Kirk did not deserve to be assassinated. But I'm overwhelmed seeing the flags of the United States of America at half-staff, calling this nation to honour and venerate a man who was an unapologetic racist and spent all of his life sowing seeds of division and hate into this land."
Death doesn’t make one a hero if they lived a life promoting hate and Canada’s MPs must understand this and apologize for their lack of judgment. Canadians deserve leaders who unequivocally reject such figures, not ones who betray our values of pluralism and diversity by applauding them. Members of Parliament, especially Liberals, must reflect deeply on their recent actions to avoid eroding our democracy further by honouring the wrong person to make the right point.
© 2025 The View From Here. © 2025 Fareed Khan. All Rights Reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment