While the style of public debating conservative activist Charlie Kirk practiced was nothing new, its prominence in our culture has risen dramatically in recent months. The bullet that pierced his neck instantaneously took his name from that of a relatively obscure political personality to the top headline of every American news outlet. 

In the months that followed, the country learned how much influence he held. His death mobilized young conservatives to become louder and more forthright, especially on college campuses. The University of Minnesota has not escaped this wave of Kirk-inspired exhibitions, as two right-wing debaters from the Minneapolis suburbs, Gavin Gillen and Samuel Givand, visit the campus weekly. 

The duo felt Kirk’s murder marked a precarious moment for freedom of speech in our country and compelled them to carry on the discourse that Kirk no longer could. 

“The biggest thing we’re trying to create here with this movement is an America where you can talk and have different perspectives,” Gillen said. “I think when you don’t have that, that’s when division is created. That’s when hate is created.” 

Many students have been receptive, welcoming them to campus with handshakes and words of encouragement. Givand said he’s found their overall experience at the University motivating, saying they’ve sparked substantial dialogue with people who possess a range of different viewpoints. 

However, others have not been so kind, offering up a litany of hostile responses and calling them, among other things, rapists, fascists and Nazis. 

“All these labels, it’s pretty egregious,” said Givand.

In other instances, the two have had their patience tested even further.

“We’ve been spat on twice,” Gillen said. “A lot of people just roll their eyes, which is totally fine. They can do that. A lot of middle fingers. A lot of drive-bys where cars roll down the window and yell things at us. And we’ve gotten quite a lot of ‘Kill yourselves.’” 

While it may feel gratifying at the moment, these types of reactions expose a real insecurity within many on the political left as well as a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of this political strategy. Giving in to the urge to escalate the situation communicates that you can’t substantiate why they’re wrong and you’re right, and the more evocative your response, the better promotional material they have for social media. 

Besides, if you believe arguing with them is beneath you, why engage with them at all? 

University media law professor Christopher Terry said he’s unable to reconcile why people who so staunchly oppose this kind of rhetoric continue to engage with and platform it.

“When I go into a bar and there’s a crazy person mumbling to themselves about flat Earth or aliens or whatever the f—king sh—t is that’s got them all worked up on this particular day, I don’t actually have to talk to that person,” Terry said. “I can just let them sit there and talk to themselves, I can even sit next to them and enjoy my drink without ever engaging with them because they’re f—king nuts. But if they have a social media presence or they do things on campus or they have a YouTube channel somehow, that rule doesn’t apply?” 

Terry said he’ll never argue for less speech, encouraging his students to challenge ideas they disagree with, but also believes the place for this is not on camera in front of someone rhetorically asking you to change their minds.

University third-year student Irene Cohen, who has seen Gillen and Givand multiple times on campus but never approached them, echoed this sentiment. She’s repeatedly had the same debate about abortion with people close to her to no avail, so why bother with two strangers in a situation they’ve orchestrated?

“Their sign says ‘Let’s talk about it,’” Cohen said. “Well, I don’t want to talk about it. They’ve already put themselves on the moral high ground, saying, ‘Sorry, I just care about life, unlike you who believe in murder.’”

The reason Kirk and others like him were able to gain more traction than any given agitator parading with a cross around a Planned Parenthood parking lot is because people keep showing up to debate them, and worse, showing up unprepared.

Years of ideological isolationism on the left have brought many to a point where they have little to no reference for how people think outside their circles of consensus. So oftentimes when students do decide to step up and challenge a sign that says, “Abortion ends a life,” they quickly start losing ground, unable to articulate their points in a context so far removed from what they’re used to, ultimately reinforcing the position they tried to debunk.

It’s incredibly easy, especially on a college campus in one of the most left-leaning cities in America, to give zero real consideration to the perspective of a huge portion of the electorate. The great benefit of having characters like Givand and Gillen on campus is that they remind us that these viewpoints are not purely hypothetical, but the strongly held convictions of many of our fellow citizens.

Moreover, when they voice their opinion, it reinforces your right to do the same.

“Do I think it’s morally gray or, like, wrong what they’re doing? Yes,” Cohen said. “But if they just continue how they’re doing it now — they’re not hurting anyone — it would set a weird precedent for the University to police them.”

Freedom of speech, the right to voice dissenting opinions, has an inverse quality: the right to hear dissenting opinions. By throwing out trite insults, you’re doing yourself more harm than they ever could with a few pieces of plywood and some buckets of paint.

It doesn’t take long to let campus debaters explain their position, especially considering they’ve usually only read one book. Once they’ve given their elevator pitch, you have a reference to test your own moral principles against. 

And if you truly oppose their message, make a measured, good-faith effort to converse. Don’t devolve into insults or try to argue a position you haven’t studied at length, because by handing someone trying to grow their platform via social media a sensational moment caught on camera, you might as well have made a cash donation.