Allen sees a hostile environment toward conservative students in Kirk reactions
Analyzing the article
National Review
Our Analysis: 1 Fallacy
For many conservative students at Amherst College, Charlie Kirk's assassination was the most radicalizing event of our lifetimes. Not just because of the horror of the assassination itself but because we witnessed our peers celebrate his murder and discourage efforts to mourn his death, as well as professors seemingly justify his assassination.
Jeb Allen contends that the widespread joy over Charlie Kirk's assassination and certain faculty members' alleged rationalizations of his death demonstrate a profound lack of intellectual tolerance and are emotionally damaging to conservative students at Amherst College, citing numerous compelling examples and some numerical data about social media engagement. However, the strength of his argument is diminished by assuming the same sentiment is being aimed at the entire conservative student population.
1. sweeping generalization • Allen extrapolates from 700 anonymous upvotes pertaining to Kirk's assassination (on an app used by around 950 of the college's 1,914 students) to suggest a far broader sentiment allegedly aimed at all conservatives, meanwhile ignoring potential sampling biases (e.g., self-selection, anonymity amplifying extreme views).
...the number of students happy with Kirk's assassination could be much higher than what upvotes indicate.
...Kirk's assassination was nothing but confirmation that there is a significant population at Amherst College who believe we should be killed for our politics, and would celebrate if it happened.
While the text presents evidence of numerous students celebrating Kirk's death and professors allegedly justifying it, extrapolating this specific sentiment about Kirk (who is characterized as "prejudiced" or "hateful") to a belief that all conservatives "should be killed for our politics" is an overreach. It generalizes from specific incidents and sentiments to a universal and violent intent without adequate supporting evidence.
In fact, after noting the plentiful upvotes referencing Kirk, Allen fails to mention that among the screenshots he includes in his article, those aimed at students such as himself actually have very few upvotes, or even have negative counts, i.e., have been down-voted. The evidence he presents actually suggests that the anti-Kirk sentiment is not being extended in significant numbers to conservative students.
Allen's argument could be strengthened by acknowledging that Kirk was not just any conservative, but rather an extraordinary one, and therefore the sentiment expressed about his death may not apply to all or even most conservatives. The rest of Allen's case would remain largely intact, albeit under a more restrained claim.
References
- Jeb Allen (2025, Oct 4). How One Campus Rejoiced at Charlie Kirk's Death.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/10/how-one-campus-rejoiced-at-charlie-kirks-death/
Disclaimer
Note that there being one or more apparent fallacies in the arguments presented in this article does not mean that every argument the arguer made was fallacious, nor does it mean there are not other arguments in existence for the same or similar position that are logically valid. Also note that checking for fallacies is not the same as verification of the premises the arguer starts from, such as facts that the arguer asserts or principles that the arguer assumes as the foundation for constructing arguments. For more about this, see our 'What is Fallacy Checking?'
NO AI TRAINING
Without in any way limiting the author’s [and publisher’s] exclusive rights under copyright, any use of this publication to “train” generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to generate text is expressly prohibited. The author reserves all rights to license uses of this work for generative AI training and development of machine learning language models.
Comments