Juno News - After Charlie Kirk, can we still talk？

00:00:00.400 It's been three months since the death of Charlie Kirk, and it was crazy at the time,

00:00:06.920 the reaction from the left. And we're going to talk about that today. I invited author,

00:00:11.740 philosopher, and former professor Patrick Keeney to join me on the show following his C2C journal

00:00:17.660 article about Charlie. And we're going to talk about the Canadian context. We're going to talk

00:00:22.400 about things that have changed or maybe not changed, got worse, got better ever since then.

00:00:26.140 So, follow the link in the description and come watch the show.

00:00:39.220 Thank you everyone for joining me. I'm Melanie Bennett for True North, and I'm joined by

00:00:43.640 Patrick Keeney, philosopher, author, and former professor. And thank you so much for joining

00:00:50.080 me again on the show. Well, my pleasure. Thank you for the privilege of talking to you, Melanie.

00:00:55.360 And as people can probably see, it's Christmas, it's December. I've decided to put on my ugly

00:01:00.720 Christmas jumper for the season. And I think for me, December is a time to reflect on the year,

00:01:09.500 reflect on some significant events. And one of the most significant events for me was the death of

00:01:18.880 Charlie Kirk. I think there are some, sometimes there are events that change the zeitgeist, that really

00:01:24.060 change the course of history. And I guess down the line, we'll know exactly how much Charlie's death

00:01:29.960 affected the course of history. But it does seem like it has had a real effect in at least the short term.

00:01:36.360 He died, or he was killed in early September, I think it was September 10th. So it's been, it's been about

00:01:42.640 three months. And at the time afterwards, there was a huge reaction from just about anybody who is interested

00:01:51.180 in politics in any way, and certainly online discourse. And I want to reflect on where we're at now with

00:01:58.600 that. Now, Patrick, in your article, you actually wrote an article for the CTC, which, which is why I reached out to you,

00:02:06.000 actually, and in there, you, you, you quoted my favorite Alexander Schulz and Solzhenitsyn quote, which

00:02:13.740 is the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. So I think we're going to

00:02:19.640 start there. Now, Charlie often defended the true, the good and the beautiful. That's something that he

00:02:25.260 because I was listening to him a lot, actually, before we spoke today, and it reminded me that he kept

00:02:28.640 talking about the true, the good and the beautiful. And now, after his death, there were many, I guess,

00:02:36.840 people who consider themselves progressive liberals, or liberals, socialists, people on the left, who

00:02:43.320 would say that Charlie's values were evil, although they wouldn't use that phrase, they might call it

00:02:50.280 hate. And they might say that there are infinite ways of understanding what's true, good and beautiful.

00:02:55.420 And Charlie's having this one understanding of that was, was evil, we'll call it evil. And then

00:03:00.460 conservatives will say that the reaction to this, this so-called liberal reaction to his values was,

00:03:07.620 was evil. And so you're a philosopher. And so how, how do we understand philosophy, philosophically?

00:03:15.000 Well, which one is correct here? Like, how do we know what, where is the evil?

00:03:19.440 Well, evil is a loaded term. And I think, as you just mentioned, the accusations leveled that Charlie

00:03:27.920 Kirk were more along the lines that he was hateful, or he was misogynistic, or that whole litany of

00:03:34.600 complaints that we so often hear from the left. And like you, I, in preparation for this conversation,

00:03:41.660 I looked at some of the videos, they're ubiquitous, as you know, you can find his videos everywhere.

00:03:49.040 And what struck me, most forcibly, I suppose, is that Charlie Kirk was unerringly civil to even people

00:03:59.160 who called him horrific things to his face. And of course, his banner famously proclaimed when he went

00:04:06.180 to these events on university campuses, proved me wrong. And from what I can see, he had a civility

00:04:15.660 about him and was only too happy to take on people who disagreed with him, which, as you know, was until

00:04:23.920 very recently, what we in the university were supposed to do. We were supposed to listen respectfully to

00:04:29.880 those who disagreed with us and engage them in conversation. I make reference in the C2C article

00:04:37.020 that you mentioned, to the British philosopher Michael Oakeshott, who defined education as a

00:04:44.700 conversation. And I always took that metaphor fairly seriously. It's a conversation that started

00:04:51.540 thousands of years ago, if you will, and continues on for each generation. And to my way of thinking,

00:04:59.280 Charlie Kirk embodied so many of those qualities that we want in our conversation lists, if you will.

00:05:07.460 That is, he listened respectfully. He disagreed with many people. But he always maintained his calm,

00:05:15.800 his equanimity, and responded to them unerringly with courtesy. Even people who, as I mentioned,

00:05:24.140 were saying quite horrific things about him. So I think what happened, to some degree, is that there

00:05:30.980 was this caricature of Charlie Kirk that started circulating, that he was a hate-filled, evil man,

00:05:38.240 and that his death, as we all know, was celebrated in certain quarters, which I find horrific. Again,

00:05:47.660 I'm of that generation in a university seminar where people who say the most outrageous things ought to

00:05:55.700 be entertained, and ought entertained with civility. I had a professor, and I can remember as a graduate

00:06:03.260 student hearing what, to my mind, were fairly silly things. They were innocuous, but they didn't really

00:06:09.220 belong, in my estimation, in a PhD seminar. But this man would unerringly respond to these students with

00:06:20.580 courtesy and respect, and give them reasons why, perhaps, they might want to rethink their position,

00:06:26.580 or provide evidence. And that way of proceeding, again, I don't profess to be an expert on everything

00:06:34.100 Charlie Kirk said, but that seemed to be emblematic of how he chose to conduct himself on university campuses.

00:06:43.860 So I'm glad that you brought that up, because since Charlie's death, we have had a little bit of an

00:06:52.340 attempt by Frances Wooderson, who's been in universities in Manitoba, and who's been recently in British Columbia.

00:07:01.460 And although she's adapting a different exercise, street epistemology exercise from a different,

00:07:05.700 from a philosopher, a Peter Bogosian, where you set up these mats, in case people watching don't

00:07:10.100 know what it is, you set up these mats from highly disagree to highly agree, and then you ask questions,

00:07:14.980 and people might, you know, change positions. It's a method of discourse, right? And Frances Wooderson took this

00:07:22.980 method at two Canadian universities on the 215 mass graves, or the indigenous mass graves residential

00:07:31.460 school question. And it was absolutely pandemonium. In Manitoba, there, her team was spat at, they were

00:07:41.700 punched. Frances herself was completely surrounded by people. And so she didn't even get into, like,

00:07:49.300 this is on the public ground of the university. It's not even in the university itself. Right, right.

00:07:54.580 And so we're nowhere near what you're describing should be good discourse.

00:07:59.780 I agree. And my career was long enough to catch, if you want, the beginning of the end of that

00:08:08.020 civility that I thought should be representative of civil discourse. I mean, there's many things that

00:08:16.500 have happened to the university. And it's hard to pick out just one or two episodes. But there seems to

00:08:23.860 be, we seem to be captive by an ideological, totalizing kind of utopianism almost, that says that

00:08:34.660 if you disagree with this view or that view, it's not that you're wrong, or that your evidence could be

00:08:43.540 better, or your reasoning is amiss. It's that you're an evil person, that you disagree with me,

00:08:50.340 and therefore I have the right to demonize you, to traduce you, to slander you, and call you horrific 0.99

00:08:58.500 names. And that's, I don't know if we want to give a date to it, but that seems to be something that has

00:09:06.260 gotten credence in the last, I don't know, 10 or 15 years or so. And it's antithetical to at least

00:09:14.100 my understanding of what university education should be about. And I saw an interview, by the way,

00:09:21.220 with Dr. Whittowson with a CBC journalist, which was absolutely cringeworthy. And this young woman 0.99

00:09:28.900 just simply refused to let Dr. Whittowson speak. I mean, it was just one of those embarrassingly

00:09:36.820 awful interviews where you just want to bury your head and say, oh, I don't really believe what I'm

00:09:40.980 watching here. But, you know, Dr. Whittowson, as you well know, is a very adept academic, and she

00:09:47.220 handles herself well in those situations. But again, the question arises, I guess, at least for

00:09:54.180 me, what has happened that we are now at a place where our universities seem incapable of entertaining

00:10:01.460 ideas that some people find offensive? And I mean, I find a lot of ideas offensive. I'm sure you do as

00:10:08.740 well, Melanie. That's just the nature of the world we live in. And I think it was George Orwell, yeah,

00:10:14.740 and it was George Orwell who said, freedom means nothing, unless it means the ability to tell people

00:10:20.900 what they don't want to hear. And you hear lots of things that you don't want to hear, as do I.

00:10:26.420 And that's just, if you will, both the price we pay for living in a democracy and

00:10:36.180 the joy of living in a democracy. And, you know, we change our minds about things, at least I hope we do.

00:10:40.900 I know I've changed my mind about lots of things over the years, and I suspect any, you know, open-minded

00:10:46.660 person does.

00:10:49.220 In America, before Charlie died, there did seem to be some kind of momentum in America to have more

00:10:57.060 discourse. Charlie's, he had very large audiences on college campuses, university campuses. And I was

00:11:05.380 hopeful, even though I never really considered myself to be conservative, I was hopeful with that

00:11:10.420 approach that was a very classical liberal approach to discourse, that that might feed into Canada. And

00:11:15.380 it felt for a while, there was a hope that that could feed into Canada, right? But we are nowhere

00:11:19.780 near that here in this country. And what happens on campus bleeds into society, you know, if we take

00:11:27.220 into account a lot of this, this Palestine-Israel discourse that is very, very vitriolic towards

00:11:34.420 Israel, right? Like it's, a lot of that is coming from the university as well. And so, three months after

00:11:40.180 Charlie's death, and are you concerned that we're kind of losing the ability to, to engage in discourse

00:11:49.460 altogether?

00:11:51.380 Um, yeah, I guess it depends on the day you asked me that question. I mean, some days I'm more hopeful than

00:11:58.020 others. I mean, one does see signs, uh, and cracks in the facade of this, uh, self-righteousness, I would say

00:12:05.620 something like that. Um, uh, I, I think, you know, just speaking as a citizen, my goodness, it gets tiring

00:12:13.700 listening to these diatribes. Uh, it really does, uh, become, uh, an exercise in, in patience to, to just get through

00:12:21.860 the day and the tsunami of, of information. But yeah, I, I, I see there is some hope that we are,

00:12:28.100 you know, approaching, uh, a new, uh, settlement, if you will, uh, about ideas and allowing ideas, uh, you

00:12:37.540 know, the freedom to flourish. And, and, you know, one of the things that has happened again in the last

00:12:43.700 decade or so is something which I find, uh, very troubling. And that is, uh, when I was growing up,

00:12:52.420 we could disagree with one another politically and you could be X and I could be Y and that's fine.

00:12:57.620 And then, you know, we just carry on our friendship or our relationship. But now it seems to me that we

00:13:03.780 are so divided into camps that if I, if I like A and you like B, that means that we cannot be friends.

00:13:11.460 And this kind of ideological self-righteousness has, has permeated all of our institutions and

00:13:18.100 indeed not even our institutions, our friendships, right? Our relationships. I mean, I can't,

00:13:22.580 I'll just interrupt quickly. It's more than just disagreement. It's more than just saying we

00:13:26.340 can't be friends because there's a lot of rhetoric, uh, certainly in the UK. I don't hear it so much

00:13:31.140 in Canada, although I started hearing this idea of a civil war, right? Because people are just

00:13:35.380 completely incapable. If we go back to the idea of Palestine protests, although we're not seeing 0.70

00:13:39.620 the same, or at least there is some violence. I'm not saying there isn't, but it's not to the degree

00:13:44.500 of America and it's certainly not to the degree of the UK, but nonetheless with Palestine protests,

00:13:49.460 I'll bring it that back there for a moment. Um, you do see, um, some violence happening. Like for

00:13:55.860 example, rebel news is Alexa Lavois is often at these Palestine protests in the, in the rebel news, uh,

00:14:01.300 crew will get physically attacked. And it's not just rebel news. It's also mainstream media who are

00:14:05.460 getting attacked for merely being present. And so it's more than just, uh, it's more than just not

00:14:11.860 being able to be friends. It's, it does feel like there's, there's violence, uh, on bubbling under

00:14:17.620 the surface that's just waiting to emerge. And how do we, how do we bring that back into civility?

00:14:24.580 Oh, that's a big question. And, uh, you know, I take your point. I think there is this incipient

00:14:29.060 violence. And, uh, I mean, one thinks of, uh, you know, Robespierre and where he, you know, redefines

00:14:36.980 our virtue as violence. I mean, violence is nothing but justice. Therefore it is virtuous. And

00:14:42.420 again, I guess, I think a lot of individuals have, um, embraced politics in place of a religion.

00:14:50.420 And so you find a politically charged understanding, uh, that has all the elements of a religion

00:14:57.860 I guess, I guess without the redemption, without the grace. So if you are filled with this self

00:15:04.420 righteousness and, uh, you know, the truth, uh, then, uh, yes, again, I guess that permits

00:15:11.300 everything, doesn't it? You know, that, that you can, uh, do away with, uh, you know, those who stand

00:15:17.700 in the way of this, this new utopia, you know, whether it's, uh, you know, the Jacobins and in

00:15:23.780 revolutionary France, or, you know, uh, Joseph Stalin, or, you know, I spent a little time in

00:15:29.540 Asia. I saw Paul Pot and what he did in Cambodia. It's just horrific. But again, none of these

00:15:34.820 individuals think that they're ever doing anything evil. They're always doing it in the name of

00:15:39.140 some greater good. And so if you give, uh, the individual or the, uh, this idea that their actions

00:15:46.900 are justified by purifying the race or whatever it happens to be, then, well, anything is possible.

00:15:53.620 And, and, uh, you know, the 20th century bears witness to that, you know, uh, just these horrific

00:15:59.220 ideas done in the name of, um, some utopian ideal or another. And yeah, so yeah, it's, it's, um, yeah,

00:16:08.180 I look at some of the protests in this country and, uh, it's hard not to disabuse myself of, you know,

00:16:14.260 that same kind of rhetoric, uh, feeding those same kinds of, uh, human emotions, uh, that have proven so

00:16:23.380 absolutely horrific and disastrous to the 20th centuries, the 20th century wars and conflicts.

00:16:30.740 Yeah. I, I feel like I'm blackpilling this conversation because I often feel,

00:16:35.220 pardon me. I, I, I do often feel that Canada's under a lot more stress, uh, than maybe some

00:16:43.380 people might realize. And it doesn't mean it's all over for us. It doesn't mean everything's

00:16:47.220 going to fall apart. I don't feel that there's this civil war threat, like, uh, like people keep,

00:16:52.740 well, people talk a lot about in the UK, for example. Uh, but there's certainly a lot to be

00:16:57.380 concerned about. And one of those, pardon me, one of those things is the ability to have discourse,

00:17:04.260 the ability to speak freely, the ability to engage with people that you may or may, uh, may disagree

00:17:09.620 with, uh, but I don't want to end on a negative note. I want to try to think about where, where are

00:17:14.980 the, uh, slivers of hope. And I don't know, maybe you could tell me one, I'll tell you what I think

00:17:21.060 might be a sliver of hope, even though, um, I, I'm still wondering whether or not I'm even

00:17:27.140 conservative, but I think one thing that could be good for Canada is to move towards a bit more

00:17:31.700 conservatism in our approach because it's gone far too crazy in the other direction. It's like unbound in

00:17:37.620 the other direction. And it seems poll after poll seems to show that Canadian in Canada,

00:17:42.420 specifically young people seem to be leaning more conservative with time. And that's very

00:17:47.860 different to Australia, to the UK, right? Where they're going much more in the left direction.

00:17:52.420 So for me, that, that is an indication that Canada could be turning around at some point.

00:17:56.980 Maybe we haven't reached that sort of peak woke that people keep talking about,

00:18:00.100 but maybe that might be on the horizon. And I don't know about you, Patrick, is there something

00:18:03.860 that you see, uh, in Canada that might, uh, that makes you feel that, yeah, we're going

00:18:08.100 to turn this ship around? Oh yeah. You know, I see evidence every day. I mean, I, I mean,

00:18:12.580 this, these kinds of conversations we're having right now, I, I think, uh, it proves,

00:18:16.660 it proves something. Uh, uh, Frances Whitteson's street epistemology. I mean, that, that's really helpful

00:18:22.900 things. Even if she can't get to actually doing it, you still, you still see that as hopeful.

00:18:27.780 The brave soul, you know, she truly is. And, uh, so I, I see that as hopeful. Um, you know,

00:18:34.420 I'm a member of a, uh, uh, society for academic freedom and scholarship, and that's a, you know,

00:18:41.300 a very small, but I think important group of people. So yeah, I do see optimistic signs on the horizons.

00:18:48.100 And, you know, uh, I, I think, uh, optimism is much preferred to, to, to whatever the opposite of that is.

00:18:56.020 And so, no, you, you see these things everywhere. And I, you know, uh, just in talking to people,

00:19:00.180 I think, uh, we change our mind in light of better evidence. And there's a lot of evidence accruing,

00:19:07.300 it seems to me that, uh, some of the ideas we were so quick to, um, jettison, um, for example,

00:19:16.420 the erosion of the humanities in our, uh, institutions of higher learning in our universities.

00:19:21.780 I think that was a terrible idea. I mean, just the, the corrosiveness, uh, uh, that,

00:19:27.380 that has been, you know, uh, faced a liberal arts faculties, uh, I guess you would expect me to say

00:19:34.020 such a thing, but I, I really do believe that we need to have, um, professors who are, um, you know,

00:19:43.780 well-rounded, well-educated, and, and well-read. And, and we need citizens more, more than professors.

00:19:49.460 We need citizens who are capable of reasoning, of judgment, the kinds of things that liberal arts

00:19:55.860 typically taught. And, and so I think there is going to be a, a realignment at some place.

00:20:01.940 Yeah. At some time and, and sooner rather than later, it strikes me.

00:20:05.460 Well, I would love to share your optimism on that point. Um, and I'm gonna, I'm gonna think about that

00:20:11.780 because I'm concerned that the, the, the academy is not pulling back on its, uh, diversion down

00:20:21.380 leftward spiral, but we, we never know things. Uh, certainly there's a lot, certainly there's more

00:20:26.900 discourse in the, uh, in, in the public sphere about these sorts of issues and, and it's no longer

00:20:31.140 that controversial to speak about woke and, and so on and so forth. So there's, there's definitely

00:20:35.700 a glimmer of hope in that direction. Right. And, you know, and we always talk about how things fall

00:20:40.340 off the cliff, you know, uh, gradually and then suddenly, you know, it's Hemingway's line about

00:20:45.620 bankruptcy, but it works the other way as well. You know, all of a sudden we find, my goodness me,

00:20:51.220 uh, there's, you know, a thousand lights blooming and, and people are starting to pick up books and read,

00:20:57.140 and, uh, they're turning off Netflix, those kinds of things, you know, and perhaps they're subtle and,

00:21:02.740 and perhaps, uh, you know, they're, they're not earth shattering, but, uh, they are signs. And I,

00:21:08.580 I do see those hopeful signs, um, uh, in abundance around me.

00:21:13.940 Oh, well, you got me thinking and I, I appreciate you taking the time to, uh, to talk to me today.

00:21:19.140 And I think it's good for people to reflect. I mean, if you're interested in Charlie Coe,

00:21:23.220 just reflect maybe for yourself, what does it mean for you? And are you seeing, uh, positive,

00:21:28.260 negative changes, uh, uh, uh, since, since his, uh, unfortunate assassination? Uh, but yeah,

00:21:35.140 I appreciate you, uh, coming onto the show and talking to me today, Patrick.

00:21:38.020 Well, thanks for the opportunity, Melanie and Merry Christmas, by the way.

00:21:42.100 Merry Christmas.

00:21:43.380 Okay.

00:21:44.980 The line dividing good and evil runs through the heart of every human being,

00:21:50.100 Alexander Solzhenitsyn. I meant that that is one of my favorite quotes, because these days it's

00:21:56.980 really hard to know, well, how do we know what's good from evil? How do you understand whether or

00:22:01.860 not it's your own echo chamber that is doing the talking, whether it's your deeply held beliefs

00:22:06.580 that is driving you to believe that the other side is evil. So I'm really glad I had an opportunity

00:22:10.900 to maybe try to unpack this a little bit with Patrick Keeney today. Uh, but I'd love to know,

00:22:15.460 uh, what you think, how do we know, how do we know if we're right? How do we know if we're wrong?

00:22:20.500 Now, I obviously believe that there is some concerning evil on the progressive left, but

00:22:26.740 how do we assess these things without becoming postmodernists ourselves? So thank you so much

00:22:32.100 for watching. Uh, please consider liking and subscribing all the usuals, and I'd love to hear

00:22:37.540 your thoughts in the comments.

Juno News - December 19, 2025

After Charlie Kirk, can we still talk？

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript