It's not hate speech; it's the speech they hate.

By: Hugo Marcelo Balderrama - 21/09/2025

Guest columnist.
Share:     

On September 10, conservative and pro-Trump activist Charlie Kirk was murdered while giving a lecture at Utah Valley University. Born on October 14, 1993, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, Kirk was known for his activism in favor of conservative values, the free market, and limited government. His ability to debate and counterargue established him as one of the most prominent figures on the American right, especially among younger people.

In February 2025, Charlie Kirk signed a deal with Trinity Broadcasting Network to host a talk show. However, his talents were not limited to rhetoric and oratory; he also explored the beautiful field of writing. His intellectual output included Campus Battlefield, The MAGA Doctrine, and The College Scam: How America's Universities Are Bankrupting and Brainwashing Away the Future of America's Youth, books that have been widely disseminated within conservative circles.

As news of his murder spread, left-wing eulogists began flooding social media with messages celebrating Kirk's cruel end. Their central argument can be summed up as: "Kirk promoted hate speech; he was a Nazi."

But is it true that Charlie Kirk was an updated version of Hitler or Mussolini?

Nothing could be further from the truth, let's see:

Kirk was against uncontrolled and illegal migration. Something any moderately informed person agrees with, since the enemies of the United States, which include all the dictatorships of 21st-century socialism, use migration as a weapon of attack against American institutions. In fact, my native Bolivia, in coordination with the Iranian theocracy and the paradictatorial government of Mexico, is one of the countries that has become a wild card in asymmetric warfare, as Argentine Security Minister Patricia Bullrich once denounced.

Regarding Critical Race Theory, Kirk described it for what it is: "a pack of lies to justify racism against white people." He always proposed that its fallacies must be combated intellectually and argumentatively. Following the lead of the great Thomas Sowell, Charlie Kirk constantly urged Black people not to allow themselves to be used as pets by progressives, who are generally rich white children who are militants on the left.

Charlie Kirk, like any good man, was against abortion. On his Instagram account, he asserted that abortion is worse than the Holocaust because, under the euphemism of denying their human status, more than a million babies are massacred each year. Furthermore, as Mariana Kappelmayer, a psychologist who specializes in post-abortion counseling, explains:

Abortion is always a traumatic experience that involves the intentional killing of another—in this case, a child—and violates the natural patterns of human functioning. What follows abortion is a trauma, because in order to end a child's life, they must first be dehumanized, objectified, reduced to a pile of cells.

Along those lines, Kirk always considered abortion to be a crime with more than one victim.

Kirk also affirmed that marriage, family, and children are the best things that can happen to men and women. For Kirk, marriage and family provide a sense of dependence, the sense of loving and being loved, of being absolutely essential to the life and happiness of others. This gives a different perspective for dealing with the problems one encounters, because there are people who depend on you, who count on you, or who care about you.

In conclusion, Kirk's ideas were pro-life, pro-family, pro-truth, and pro-national security. Many agnostics and atheists may disagree with his religious stance, but calling his positions hate speech is just another of the left's ploys to justify violence against those who think differently: it's not hate speech; it's the speech they hate.

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».