Charlie Kirk has never received a warm welcome in the pages of this magazine. It doesn’t matter now. The assassination of Kirk is a tragedy. Morally, it is unjustifiable. Politically, it is cause for serious alarm. A larger spiral into political violence would be a catastrophe for the Left.
As of the time of this writing, no one knows the shooter’s ideology or motivations. But some key points are clear enough.
No one should be killed as punishment for political expression, no matter how objectionable. In addition to our basic abhorrence of violence, we are also proponents of democracy, which depends on free speech and open inquiry. Without them, collective self-governance is impossible and tyranny becomes inevitable. Imposing silence on political opponents by brute force, whether in the form of state crackdowns on dissent or lone-wolf assassinations of leaders, undermines a principle that democratic socialists have always held dear.
This is the magazine which used to correct interviewers who asked them "Why are you named Jacobin? Weren't they a bunch of head chopping lunatics?" and be like "Actually, we're named after the Black Jacobins" (who's "reign of terror" was far more comprehensive, but this was also a funny rhetorical trick because the interviewers don't know shit about Haiti and would be like "huh. interesting.").
This shit is absolutely pathetic. Infatuated with the aesthetic of revolution, but shitting their pants and running for the hills at the first sight of blood. They don't have to fucking celebrate or anything. Just publish an obituary listing the man's "greatest hits." Lead the audience to the conclusion that he got what he fucking had coming to him. Or say nothing.
Just change the name to Girondin at this point.