Why the US is truly on a ‘knife-edge’ right now
The bloodshed erupting from the US over the past week has left the world stunned and scared about what will happen next. Here is what you need to know.
The footage is shocking, appalling, and inciteful.
A handsome young conservative celebrity is gunned down in a public forum. A beautiful young Ukrainian immigrant is knifed to death on a public train.
Both shocking attacks were caught in high-definition video. Both have exploded across social media as evidence for dozens of dogmatic political arguments.
Meanwhile, yet another school shooting had taken place in the United States. Domestic violence killings continued. And children shot themselves (and others) while playing with loaded guns.
But only gangland crime has been presented alongside these killings by social media algorithms. And that’s because it’s at the heart of a political bunfight over whether or not US President Donald Trump should send US National Guard troops into Chicago.
The killings appear inherently different.
But, put together, they’ve put America on a knife-edge.
One, that of Charles Kirk, appears to be the assassination of an up-and-coming Make America Great Again (MAGA) evangelist.
The other, that of Iryna Zarutska, is presented as proof of America’s degeneracy and how the justice system allows potential murderers to roam the streets. Though its mental health aspects have failed to gain traction.
But both are being used to fuel the fires of political polarisation. And that’s becoming increasingly radicalised.
President Trump had responded to Zarutska’s death by blaming the “radical left” for caring more for convicted criminals and immigrants than for everyday US citizens.
Now he has responded to Kirk’s death by calling out the “radical left” for “rhetoric that is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today.”
“It’s a long past time for all Americans and the media to confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequences of demonising those with whom you disagree day after day, year after year, in the most hateful and despicable way possible”.
Instant radicalisation
Footage of the killings of Kirk and Zarutska is being poured into social media feeds to fuel the ever-present flame wars.
Both were caught on surveillance cameras.
The proliferation of these devices didn’t save either Kirk or Zarutska’s lives. But the camera doesn’t lie (if it hasn’t been modified by AI).
It shows what happened, how and where.
It’s tangible, visible evidence that crime is real. That political conflict is real.
It can be leaked or supplied to social media.
It can be packaged with suitably tailored (if diametrically opposed) messages.
From there, algorithms seize on the controversy, ghoulish fascination and disgust they generate.
It’s just business, after all.
The big picture, however, is smothered by the shock and awe.
And dogma.
“A radicalisation process that once unfolded over months or years now typically takes days or even hours, largely due to the prevalence of extremist short-form online propaganda,” warns Dr Julie Hwang of the Soufan Centre think tank.
“Right-wing extremism, left-wing extremism, nihilistic and ‘salad bar’ extremism, and Islamist extremism all make use of social media to target and radicalise youths. According to the Global Terrorism Index, in the West, far-right extremism alone has risen 250 per cent over the last five years.”
Social media feeds bypass parents, community leaders, authorities - and often the law - in spreading revenue-rich controversy. But people, especially youth, can be impressionable.
“Platforms like TikTok, X, and Facebook enable extremists to access younger audiences, and algorithms channel impressionable youths to ever more emotionally charged content in order to maximise clicks and stays,” Dr Hwang adds.
Action, reaction
Charlie Kirk believed he was doing his god’s work.
He was a podcaster with millions of followers. He was the founder of businesses with hundreds of millions of dollars in turnover.
The 31-year-old Christian Nationalist was shot by a sniper while conducting one of his signature public debates with young college students in Utah.
The footage went viral.
“He fought for liberty, democracy, justice, and the American people,” Trump said in a video posted to social media. “He’s a martyr for truth and freedom.”
Decarlos Brown believed someone was “working the materials” implanted in his head.
The 34-year-old was a drifter. He had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. He’d fallen foul of the law many times for violent crimes.
The convicted criminal attacked and killed 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska in a North Carolina train near the city of Charlotte.
The footage went viral.
“The ANIMAL who so violently killed the beautiful young lady from Ukraine, who came to America searching for peace and safety, should be given a ‘Quick’ (there is no doubt!) Trial, and only awarded THE DEATH PENALTY,” President Trump posted on Truth Social. “There can be no other option!!!”
Trump has himself been the target of two assassination attempts.
A sniper bullet grazed his ear as he campaigned in Butler, Pennsylvania, last year. Later, a gunman was spotted hiding in a golf club’s bushes, awaiting the President’s approach.
A year later, their motives remain uncertain.
Paying the blood price
Kirk once said killings were a price he was willing to pay.
“I think it’s worth it,” he said in 2023. “I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other god-given rights.”
He didn’t know he’d pay such a blood price personally.
But killings are powerful political motivators.
The murder of 46-year-old Black American George Floyd in 2020 by a white police officer triggered worldwide protests against police brutality, racism and accountability. It went on to revive Black Lives Matter demonstrations across the US.
“They are not ‘peaceful protesters’, as Sleepy Joe and the Democrats call them, they are THUGS - And it is all taking place in Democrat run cities,” Trump insisted at the time.
“Call me and request Federal HELP. We will solve your problems in a matter of minutes.”
Now in his second term of office, Trump is proving true to his word. He has sent federal forces into Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles, against the will of their State Governors, to enforce his vision of law and order.
The 47th President of the United States insists he is waging all-out war on crime.
Despite statistics pointing to a nationwide fall in violent crime over the past decade, the former reality television host and real estate entrepreneur is pointing to high-profile incidents to justify his controversial moves.
Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) young gun Edward Coristine was beaten up in Washington, D.C., early last month. The 19-year-old nicknamed “Big Balls” says he was escorting a young woman to her car.
Days later, Trump ordered the National Guard into the city.
“A young man was beat up by a bunch of thugs in DC,” he said. “Either they’re gonna straighten their act out in the terms of government and in terms of protection or we’re gonna have to federalise and run it the way it’s supposed to be run.”
Kirk was also one of Trump’s most vocal supporters.
“So why is our capital a joke, a mess, a disgrace?” he told his podcast audience after the ‘Big Balls’ assault. “Even if crime is dropping, the lower rates are still a complete and total humiliation and disgrace.
“Roll in the tanks! Bring in the drones! Send in the Marines! We’re federalising Washington, D.C.”
His killing became another battle cry.
“An assassin tried to silence him with a bullet, but he failed, because, together, we will ensure that his voice, his message, and his legacy will live on for countless generations to come,” Trump said after Kirk was shot. “Today, because of this heinous act, Charlie’s voice has become bigger and grander than ever before. And it’s not even close.”
With us, or against us?
“It’s more than just hysteria. There’s been an effort to defend people that commit heinous crimes or almost glorify them or just neglect the severity of their crimes on innocent people,” argues Hoover Institution historian Victor Hanson.
“But the point is, a lot of people on social media and the Left said, ‘Why should we worry about a wealthy, basically, white kid, who gets roughed up a bit? Is that why Donald Trump went into Washington? And if so, we don’t really care.’ It was very heartless.”
His essay, published by the far-right Heritage Foundation, echoes Trump’s anger at Kirk and Zarutska’s killings.
And MAGA is embracing that message.
“There’s never going to be another assassin to take out someone like the way they did because what comes next will be swift, quick, and it will be retribution,” MAGA commentator Jack Posobiec insisted.
“We’re not going to back off an inch,” former Trump advisor Steve Bannon added. “If you’re gonna back off, then this is not for you.”
They’re fighting words.
But such tactics of populism are being adopted by political parties of all directions and colours.
Because they work.
“Even traditionally moderate parties are sometimes adopting the stark us-versus-them language that defines populism as a thin ideology, especially on issues such as immigration,” argues political scientist Vlad Sirdea-Hernea.
“When parties see the electoral success of populist messaging for their competitors, they too adopt anti-elite, people-centric rhetoric.”
It simplifies politics. It presents simplistic but straightforward arguments.
“Left-leaning parties can frame populism around social justice and economic inequality; right-leaning parties emphasise nationalism and cultural preservation,” he argues.
“Both approaches tap into the same underlying frustration with political establishments, while maintaining their core ideological commitments.”
That’s producing a new breed of extremist.
“We are seeing a trend in that, often, the attackers aren’t fitting into any traditional extremist box or ideology,” Institute for Strategic Dialogue threat analyst Katherine Keneally told US media.
“When we had the horrific attacks in Buffalo, New York, or in New Zealand many years ago, those were very clear attacks that were motivated by white supremacy. They fit into these very clear, traditional extremism lenses.
“What we’re often seeing now is that it has become much more hybridised, that the individuals who are conducting attacks or plotting to conduct attacks are not fitting into any traditional extremist bucket.”
Jamie Seidel is a freelance writer | @jamieseidel.bsky.social
More Coverage
Originally published as Why the US is truly on a ‘knife-edge’ right now
