EDITORS' CORNER
Key Takeaways
- Michael Morshed from UC San Diego retracted his insensitive comments regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk, stating he acted impulsively.
- Morshed expressed regret for his remarks, affirming that Kirk did not deserve violence, and emphasized the importance of considering the loved ones affected by such tragedies.
- He acknowledged that while he disagrees with some of Kirk's views, he found common ground with some of his ideas, reflecting on the implications of public debates and the potential risks involved.
A University of California San Diego writing instructor walked back his comments about the assassination of Charlie Kirk in comments given to The College Fix.
After the killing of the Turning Point USA CEO, Michael Morshed wrote on a friend’s social media post: “He f**cked around and found out.”
But now he said he regrets his words.
“The most basic answer is I said it because sometimes I’m an idiot who acts impulsive, and my tongue is a bit too sharp. I have been since I was a kid,” Morshed told The Fix via email on Monday.
“More importantly, I think it was an insensitive comment on my part. I don’t think Kirk deserved to be killed. I think he was a [debater] and was non-violent from what I have seen,” Morshed said. “Given that, he did not deserve violence against him, and I hope the person who killed him goes to jail. That person was 100% in the wrong.”
The killing has led Morshed to look more into Kirk and find some areas of agreement.
“When someone is killed, I feel horrible for their loved ones, and I am seeing in the aftermath of Kirk’s death how much people loved him,” Morshed told The Fix. “This is leading me to look into Kirk some more, and I have found that I agree with the core of some of his ideas.”
Morshed also wanted to provide further context to what he was trying to say. “The essence of my opinion is that, while not deserving to die, Kirk could have taken more precautions,”
Morshed, suggesting better security was needed and the events should have been indoors for Kirk’s own safety.
The professor also said many young people debating him are “already sensitive and maybe even mentally ill” which created the potential for more problems.
Morshed said:
Clips of these debates went on social media, and likely humiliated the kids even further. This does not mean he deserved to die. It means he was antagonizing sensitive groups that have, in the past, often resorted to violence. Unfortunately, this is common among influential people who are assassinated. I appreciate that Kirk wanted to reach those people, it’s Christ-like, but I feel like public events like that weren’t a good venue for it. They need something less antagonistic than a debate that is clipped on social media. This is more an issue with youth than Kirk.
In his final comments, he reiterated that he did “really feel for Kirk’s loved ones and our country as a whole” and expressed regret again that what he wrote “was insensitive and victim-blaming.”
“And that was wrong of me. I’m far from being an enemy of Kirk.”
MORE: UCLA puts ‘race and equity’ director on leave following Charlie Kirk comments
