Political violence in US mirrors 1960s turmoil, historian warns after Charlie Kirk shooting
Political violence and extreme rhetoric in the United States today mirrors the turbulent 1960s, but with key differences that make the current era particularly challenging, according to presidential historian and ABC News contributor Mark Updegrove.
"The 1960s were another time of great upheaval and discord and division," Updegrove told ABC News on Thursday, one day after the fatal shooting of conservative youth leader Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University. "In just five years, we saw the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, and in 1968 alone, the back-to-back assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy."
As FBI agents recovered what they believed to be the murder weapon—a high-powered bolt action rifle—from a wooded area near the shooting site and continued their manhunt for the suspect, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox labeled Kirk's death a "political assassination."
The "assassination" led Updegrove to highlight a distinction between today's political violence and that of the 1960s: The role of social media in amplifying extreme views.
"Social media gives us an opportunity to purvey extreme views from one side or the other with absolute impunity," Updegrove said. "For social media purveyors, that enragement means engagement. It's good for their business."
The historian emphasized that political violence has emerged from across the ideological spectrum.
"It's happening from all sides, not just the left," he said. "It's extremism that we need to prevent in this country."
Reflecting on former first lady Lady Bird Johnson's words, Updegrove recalled her observation that "the clash of ideas is the sound of freedom." However, he stressed that while Americans are entitled to different views, violence is never the solution in a democracy.
Kirk's death could have lasting implications for conservative youth movements, according to Updegrove.
"He was a leader who had great charisma and great impact," he said, noting Kirk's significant influence in mobilizing young voters. "He may be martyred... there might be people who rise up and try to fill that gap."
Drawing another parallel to the civil rights era, Updegrove pointed out how movements can struggle to maintain momentum after losing charismatic leaders.
"We saw with Dr. Martin Luther King [who] was assassinated in 1968, the civil rights movement never quite was able to sustain that continued forward movement because he was such an effective leader," he said.
Looking into the future, Updegrove emphasized the importance of national unity.
"We are a less effective nation when we are divided," he said, expressing hope for reconciliation rather than further conflict.
