On narcisissm and totalitarianism - Freedom of speech in the wake of Charlie Kirk's murder.

Dear friends,

This morning I opened the digital newspapers and the first thing I saw was that the Talkshow of Jimmy Kimmel in America was taken off the air after he made remarks about the murder of Charlie Kirk. He had said that the “MAGA gang” is now trying to further polarize society by suggesting that the ‘child’ who killed Charlie Kirk did not come from MAGA itself.

That statement is likely incorrect. The accused murderer came from a Republican family but idolized Antifa. It may be that, in terms of identity, he wavered back and forth between extreme right and extreme left. I'm not his psychologist, but anyone with some understanding of human nature knows that a person can contain the most contradictory things at the same time. Especially at the point where his being craves acts to rid itself of destructive impulses, it hardly matters whether the ship is heading for its destruction under a ‘left’ or ‘right’ flag.

Setting that aside, Jimmy Kimmel’s remark is actually beside the point and unwise. The murder is indeed being celebrated mainly on the left, and that clearly shows where the sympathy for it lies.

Now to what I really want to say: I find it troubling that an employer cancels a talk show for that reason, however foolish and wrong the host’s remark may be. For instance, the tasteless remark did not contain a call to violence nor was it a direct threat. A few days earlier Kimmel had called the murder as a senseless act of violence and said he would never understand people who celebrate such a crime. So this is not a form of speech that would fall outside the protection of the famous and esteemed First Amendment.

That brings us to the most problematic aspect: President Donald Trump did not hide his enthusiasm for the show being taken off the air. That aligns with a broader stance of the Trump administration on this matter. The Trump administration also announced last week that anyone who openly approves of Charlie Kirk’s murder would face consequences. In recent days the words have been followed by deeds. In Texas, a hundred teachers were dismissed after they expressed some kind of positive sentiment about the murder on their personal social media profiles. The statements included things like "Karma found him", "You reap what you sow. This is not a tragedy. It’s a victory", "Looks like he took one for the team. Hope he is roasting!" or victim-blaming arguments that labeled Kirk as a "racist, homophobic, a misogynist, transphobic nasty person".

Teachers have a role-model function. That is true. But traditionally they also have petty human sides and say foolish things. Is it really a good development that they are fired for that? I understand that Trump, given his own history, feels the urge to indulge in revengeful sentiments. To give one example: his Twitter-account was removed along with the accounts of several other Republicans. Officially Twitter was responsible for that, but since Mark Zuckerberg’s public confession we know that the Biden administration mercilessly pressured social media platforms to censor dissident voices. Let's say there is a healthy chance that Biden rather than Twitter was responsible for the censorship.

That does not change the fact: firing teachers is another step in the wrong direction. Re-read the statements I listed above. In most cases here as well there is no form of speech that would not be protected by the First Amendment.

The Republicans had the chance to show that they opposed the trend toward an increasingly intolerant censorship society, with arrests for social media posts that go against the established order (in Great Britain), with Digital Services Acts that lock social media platforms into a politically correct straitjacket (in Europe), with ‘Shield for Democracy’ that monitors citizens into the smallest corners of their privacy while at the same time allowing Ursula von der Leyen to keep her behind-the-scenes deals with the pharmaceutical industry secret (also in Europe), with Joe Biden forcing Mark Zuckerberg and others to censor the truth during the COVID crisis, and so on.

There were already signs that the move toward surveillance and intolerance would not be stopped by Donald Trump. Ultimately, when the chaos is complete and everyone is trying to cancel and sack everyone else, people will ask machines to make ethical and moral judgments. Bill Gates has already enthusiastically announced that he is developing an AI platform that will screen the entire public sphere for disinformation and hate speech. That promises well. John Kerry literally says it here: we need to get rid of that First Amendment to help eliminate disinformation.

The current reaction to Charlie Kirk's murder confirms how hard it is to reverse a trend toward totalitarianism. The only thing that can get the job done is a group of leaders and part of the population that gives ethical principles radical priority over every personal narcissistic injury and the gratification of revenge.

Ultimately it's not about whether the left or the right is right. The question is how we find a path to a truly humane society. In a truly humane society opinion matters but is nevertheless secondary. Primary is that you grant one another the right to an opinion, even if it deviates from what is generally considered the correct view. I have often said: any group whose binding principle is opinion becomes a mass. Whether that opinion is left or right is of secondary importance.

There is nothing to expect from any group that sanctifies opinions and brands other opinions as illegitimate and censurable. Yet there is something to expect from a group united by a genuine tolerance for different opinions, a group that consistently practices the most fundamental of all arts: the art of sincere speaking and sincere listening — an art we can only practice if we can minimally put aside the narcissism of being unquestionably right and allow, through the cracks and gaps in our ego, a little of the Other with a different opinion inside.

In principle, the solution to totalitarianism is actually simple. Once the group that unites around sincere speaking and listening becomes stronger than the masses that form around a (propagandized) opinion, the era of totalitarianism will be over.

Mattias