Prove me wrong

By Wim Laven

Charlie Kirk rose to prominence by promoting a racist, sexist, and bigoted agenda under the guise of Christianity, using distorted, barroom-style arguments that masquerade as sincere debate. Prove me wrong.

It is not an argument or debate. It is fallacy. A trick that is dressed up as logic—if I’m not right, then prove it. It looks convincing on the surface, especially to those inclined to believe (for any number of reasons), but collapses under any real scrutiny because it is not actually a developed position.

In honest debate the first step is a clearly articulated position and then the support for that position follows. Premises develop, through logic, into a conclusion. Wanting something to be true does not make it so, evidence and reasoning that reflect reality are the structure of coherent discourse; fallacy is merely performance.

It is meme thinking, present in social media threads, and it is easily recycled by trolls, AI bots, and disinformation campaigns. Charlie Kirk is not the first or last to peddle in such stagecraft. But I wish he had not been shot.

I do not care what he did or did not say about gun control, the murder of George Floyd, or empathy. We teach 2^nd graders that two wrongs do not make a right and we spend our entire lives (hopefully) with the benefits and blessings of due process. Indeed, through Turning Point USA he had a professor watchlist, and friends of mine were harassed because of him, and I have other friends who celebrated Charlie Kirk for optimism that resonated with them.

This is truly a divided country; those who liked Kirk’s “courage is contagious” Christianity and felt empowered by it did not necessarily know or subscribe to his  “Black women do not have the brain processing power to be taken seriously” political positioning with DEI.

Those who know and are offended by his, “I’m sorry. If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified’” politics, on the other hand, are not likely to know about the positivity and joy he brought to people through charity and faith.

What I’m most focused on in the moment, however, is a concern I have observed from many directions: hyping political violence, comes in waves, etc. I will take the “prove me wrong” on that front.

There is considerable evidence that violence, like disease, spreads in a contagious way. The wave phenomenon, so to speak. But the much more natural course of events—human desire is for peace—and in the timeline of the history of the species and predecessors (if we go all the way back to Lucy) only the smallest fraction—tiny slivers of humanity feature senseless killing, war, and political violence.

So, yes, there could be copycats, and revenge, and so on… but the waves subside, and this is what the evidence shows. There are many more people looking to do good—on all sides—and the focus on the bad (again, from all sides) overshadows this truth. Media—the news and everyday—operate with a negative bias, which is internalized but misses the world of good we live side by side to.

I’ve sat side by side with hundreds of strangers, people just like Charlie Kirk, whom I may have some political disagreements with, but much more in common. The rhetoric and pressures can trick or scare us away from this awareness. The amygdala can be hijacked and push us to fight or flight type reactions; there is no doubt that some politicians and personalities thrive on this, but they are outliers.

Cognitive science can definitively demonstrate (prove me wrong) that humans, along with a wide array of animal species, have reinforced neural pathways for harm aversion—both for ourselves and others, empathic concern—we sometimes share in the suffering of others, and a tendency to mirror the emotions we are surrounded by. We are literally hardwired with the disposition of doing on to others as they do on to us.

I am politically as opposed to Charlie Kirk as much as it gets and I don’t have an ounce of celebration for what happened to him. That is what shared humanity is; I know the pain that is losing a father or any loved one, and I would not wish that upon anyone. All the talk about hatred and rage reflects unnatural distortions and the manipulation of our natural dispositions—at our cores, we know and teach a social contract. Being kind to one another is fundamental no matter the holy book or political figures we subscribe to.

Prove me wrong.

       Wim Laven, Ph.D., syndicated by PeaceVoice, teaches courses in political science and conflict resolution.