In a climate already fraught with tension, the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk has sent shockwaves through college campuses, political circles, and social media spheres across the United States. What was supposed to be a spirited debate at Dartmouth College between two of the most recognizable voices from opposing ends of the political spectrum—Hasan Piker and Charlie Kirk—has instead become a flashpoint in the ongoing conversation about political violence, free speech, and the role of social media in amplifying extremism.
Jack Posobiec, Senior Editor at Human Events and host of the Human Events Daily podcast, did not mince words when he described the current situation. “We are now experiencing the largest wave of leftist violence since 2020,” Posobiec wrote, highlighting what he sees as a disturbing escalation. “It’s targeted killings. And it’s going to get worse.” According to Posobiec, the death of Charlie Kirk is not an isolated incident but part of a broader, more dangerous trend targeting conservatives.
The alarm bells are certainly ringing among conservative influencers. Many, like Posobiec, argue that the dangers of open political expression have never been higher. In the wake of Kirk’s assassination, online forums and podcasts have been flooded with warnings and calls for increased vigilance. The sense of vulnerability is palpable. “It is disconcerting to feel that, as somebody who holds a lot of conservative views, that that would maybe be enough to get you shot,” said Jack Coleman, president of the Dartmouth Conservatives student club and ambassador for the Dartmouth Political Union, in an interview with WCAX. Coleman’s words reflect the anxiety now gripping many who feel their beliefs could make them targets.
The debate that was supposed to happen between Kirk and Hasan Piker was designed to be a model of open, respectful discourse—a rare commodity in today’s polarized environment. Instead, its cancellation has become a symbol of the very divisions it sought to bridge. Coleman explained, “It is not really meant to replace what would have been, but it is going to be a place for students who, however you are feeling about this, to come and sort of talk through that with professors.” The dinner and candlelight vigil, hastily organized for September 25, 2025, on the Dartmouth Green, aimed to give students a safe space to process the tragedy, regardless of their political leanings.
Yet, the undercurrents of violence are not confined to the physical world. Social media platforms, already under scrutiny for their role in spreading misinformation and hate, have once again become battlegrounds. Hasan Piker, known online as HasanAbi and boasting over three million followers on Twitch, recently used his platform to deliver a chilling message: “Let the streets soak in their f**king red capitalist blood.” Such rhetoric, coming from influencers with massive online followings, is seen by many as pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire.
Professor Sean Westwood, who has written extensively on the causes of political violence, offered a sobering analysis of the situation. “We see the fringes of the parties dominating media coverage because they have direct access to citizens,” Westwood told WCAX. He pointed to the devices we all carry—smartphones, tablets, laptops—as conduits for these extreme voices. “Social media magnifies the extremists. It is the case that most members of Congress do their job, but those members of Congress don’t get media attention.” The implication is clear: while the majority of political actors may be reasonable, it is the loudest, most incendiary voices that shape the narrative and, sometimes, incite action.
In the days following Kirk’s assassination, Dartmouth College became a microcosm of the national debate. The nonpartisan student group that had organized the debate quickly pivoted, planning a dinner and a vigil in place of the event. The hope, according to organizers, was to channel grief and fear into dialogue and healing. “I think something we all need to do is come together and recognize the human tragedy of this,” Coleman said. Despite the horror of recent events, he still clings to a sense of optimism. “I think if we can put people’s humanity first, we can begin to move on.”
Meanwhile, conservative commentator Dave Rubin, host of The Rubin Report on Rumble and author of Don’t Burn This Country, continues his “Don’t Burn This World” tour, undeterred by the escalating climate. Rubin, who recently completed a sold-out run alongside Jordan Peterson, is set to return to Australia in October 2025 for three exclusive shows—Melbourne on October 18 with Peta Credlin, Sydney on October 21 with former Prime Minister John Anderson, and Brisbane on October 27 with British journalist Andrew Neil. Tickets are available at daverubin.com/events. Rubin’s presence on the international stage signals a determination among some conservatives to keep speaking out, even as the risks increase.
For many students at Dartmouth and beyond, the question now is how to move forward. The dinner and vigil, held on the same day Kirk was to debate Piker, provided a moment for reflection—a rare pause in the relentless churn of news cycles and social media posts. Professors, students, and community members gathered not just to mourn, but to consider how political discourse might be salvaged from the wreckage. “The debate’s mission was to foster open and respectful political discourse,” Coleman emphasized, underscoring what was lost and what must be rebuilt.
The tragedy has also reignited debates about the responsibilities of those with large audiences. When influencers like Piker deploy violent rhetoric to millions, critics argue, the consequences can be unpredictable and, as recent events suggest, catastrophic. Yet, others caution against conflating speech with violence, warning that restricting expression could have its own chilling effects on democracy.
As the dust settles, Dartmouth’s response offers a glimmer of hope. The willingness to gather, grieve, and talk across divides, however fragile, stands in stark contrast to the vitriol dominating much of the national conversation. “Healing is possible if we look at each other as individuals rather than political opponents,” Coleman said, echoing a sentiment that many hope will take root, even as the country navigates one of its most turbulent periods in recent memory.
The aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination will undoubtedly reverberate for months, if not years. But for one night on a New Hampshire campus, students and faculty chose candles over confrontation, conversation over chaos—a small but meaningful step toward a future where tragedy does not have the last word.
