The Turning Point

From celebration to reckoning.

Millions have turned their backs on the Democrats—not for political reasons, but because the party was exposed as morally bankrupt.

Screenshot from the live broadcast on Charlie Kirk’s YouTube channel.

“This is the turning point!” The words echo across social media, through streets, schools, and workplaces. They're said with shock, but also with certainty: everything has changed. They point both to Kirk’s legacy and to the moment the Democrats revealed their true nature. The assassination happened the day before 9/11, and on the very day of remembrance for the worst terrorist attack in history, the cheers from their own party members mirrored the terrorists who celebrated when the towers fell. After this, the left is left with two choices: double down on radicalism and violence, or admit that they themselves are the threat to democracy.

The shock that shattered trust
The bullet that killed Charlie Kirk also hit the Democrats squarely in the heart of their own credibility. Kirk wasn’t known for silencing his opponents. On the contrary. He handed the microphone to anyone, even to his fiercest critics, and made the stage a place for questions and debate. He stood for openness, for dialogue, for the raw, unfiltered confrontation of ideas.

And then, in front of thousands of witnesses, he was shot into silence. The shock could have united people—but it didn’t. Instead, videos flooded social media—not of people crying or expressing horror, but of people on the left cheering. They laughed, they celebrated, they spread clips as if it were a win.

For many lifelong Democrats, this was the final straw. They said they felt sick. They said they couldn’t believe they had spent their lives supporting a party filled with people who would celebrate a political assassination. Because the attack happened the day before 9/11, the symbolism became almost unbearable—reminding many of the terrorists who danced in the streets when the towers in New York collapsed. The same schadenfreude. The same ice-cold lack of compassion.

That was the moment many realized this wasn’t about politics anymore—it was about morality. And that realization created not just personal distance, but a deep, irreconcilable rift that is now tearing the party apart from the inside. Once you’ve seen that side of your own party—the side that, for many, was exposed in the celebration of Kirk’s death—you can’t unsee it.

From political disagreement to moral awakening
What makes this shift so seismic is that it’s no longer about policy. Ordinary people can live with disagreements over taxes, healthcare, or climate change. Those things can be renegotiated, and many have changed parties multiple times in their lives for pragmatic reasons. But when you see your fellow party members celebrating the murder of a political opponent, it’s no longer politics—it’s morality. And a moral rupture doesn’t heal.

That’s why so many are saying they’ll never go back. They’re calling the Democrats evil. They’re saying the Democrats are the real threat to democracy. Because what does democracy mean if it’s apparently acceptable for some to cheer when a voice is silenced by bullets? How can a party that’s spent years preaching about “democracy on the ballot” be the same gathering point for people who celebrate the killing of ideological opponents?

It started with the videos. People on the left cheering that Charlie Kirk was dead, mocking him, his widow, and his kids—openly, on social media. Then came the backlash. Democrats with a conscience saw what their own peers were doing, and said flat-out that they could no longer be part of such a party. Many filmed themselves, explaining why, and posted it online.

When politics becomes morality, there’s no going back. You can change your mind about a law or a candidate. But you can’t return to a party you’ve called evil and compared to terrorists, a party you’ve said makes you sick, without losing yourself. That’s why this isn’t a temporary wave. It’s an awakening.

The irony that creates a martyr
Amid all the celebration on the left, something emerged that has to be the height of contradiction. Several people posted videos triumphantly declaring that Charlie Kirk could never be a martyr—he wasn’t worthy, he wasn’t built for it. But what is a martyr if not someone killed for what they stood for? And what did Kirk stand for? Open debate, free speech, and the right to question. He handed the mic to his ideological enemies and let them speak.

The irony is that in the very moment they cheered his death, they cemented his status as a martyr. To millions of people, he now stands as a symbol of how words and ideas were met with bullets and hate. The more they mock and laugh, the clearer the contrast becomes—between a man who stood on stage and gave his opponents the microphone, and a mob that cheers when a bullet silences his voice.

That’s why the comparison to Martin Luther King Jr. is being made. Not just because both were assassinated, but because both fought for equality—King for civil rights in his time, Kirk for conservatives to be given the same space and respect in a public sphere that routinely cancels them. Both were seen as threats to a system that couldn’t handle their voices. And both were met with bullets.

Now people look at Kirk the same way. He won’t be forgotten; he becomes a symbol. The Democrats aren’t just losing voters—they’re losing their moral authority. Because once you’re perceived as the party that celebrates murder, there’s no coming back. Then all the slogans about “democracy” are just empty words. Then you’re not the protector—you’re the threat. And that’s why so many are saying: never again.

A mental tsunami
I’ve previously written about the looming global mental tsunami—a wave of identity crises and psychological pain triggered by collapsing narratives. I never imagined it would be set off by a political assassination. But that’s exactly what Kirk’s murder has done: it ripped the foundation out from under millions of people and left them in shock, in doubt, in freefall.

When people realize they’ve been part of something that celebrates death, it’s not just a political reckoning—it’s an existential crisis. For many, it will feel like waking up in a foreign world, where their own party and their own friends are only recognizable through their coldness and hate.

Read my blog post: A Global Mental Tsunami

We’ve already seen how people who cheered the assassination have lost their jobs. Employers won’t tolerate their staff celebrating a man being shot, two young children losing their father, and a wife being left alone. A line has been crossed—and there will be consequences.