The Durability of the Left’s Comforting Myths

By Noah Rothman

Wednesday, January 28, 2026

 

The dawn of the 2010s was accompanied by the popularization of a self-flattering intellectual fad on the left. It was one that presupposed the American right had cocooned itself in an impenetrable information silo. Whereas progressives and liberals had their fingers on the American pulse and its members were eager to contend with events and synthesize new knowledge with their existing political outlook, the obdurate right had succumbed to “epistemic closure.”

 

Throughout the decade that followed, denizens of the intellectual left’s salons satisfied themselves with the presumption that they alone could confront the world as it was. The paucity of evidence in support of this theory of left-wing intellectual superiority seemed never to shake the faithful of their adherence to it — a trait that seemed incompatible with the theory even at the time.

 

That historical dalliance with narcissism masquerading as political science came to mind when CNN guest and onetime MSNBC host Tiffany Cross asserted without a hint of self-consciousness that Charlie Kirk’s alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, was “right-wing.”

 

Via Mediaite:

 

After some crosstalk from the larger panel, [CNN legal analyst Elie] Honig began to respond, saying, “I take your point and I accept the data, I’m not saying it’s exactly 50-50 equal. But let’s also not forget, Charlie Kirk was murdered, the president-”

 

“Not by a left-wing extremist!” interjected Cross. “That person espoused very right-wing-” . . .

 

“There’s Donald Trump on this side, there is Charlie Kirk on this side,” continued Honig as Cross continued to try to cut him off.

 

“But wait, you’re saying that, but those are right-wing people,” insisted Cross as the pair sparred. “That is BS, and even the attacks that you’re referencing, Elie, those were right-wing people.”

 

“That’s just not true! Charlie Kirk? That’s not a right-wing person!” exclaimed Honig.

 

Think of all the inconvenient facts that one must compartmentalize or, perhaps, studiously avoid encountering to preserve that erroneous impression of the figure charged with Kirk’s murder.

 

Cross either did not know or did not recall the words etched on Robinson’s bullets: “Hey fascist, catch!,” “Bella caio,” a reference to an anti-fascist anthem from World War II that became a Soviet hymn, and terms familiar to consumers of “only furry and role-play culture.”

 

To maintain Cross’s outlook, she would have had to dismiss the statements from Robinson’s friends. The alleged murderer was “pretty left on everything,” according to one acquaintance. He was “the only member of his family that was really leftist.”

 

She was compelled even to dismiss the conclusions of local Utah law enforcement and its political leaders. Robinson “had become more political and had started to lean more to the left,” according to Utah County attorney Jeff Gray. Utah Governor Spencer Cox confirmed that the purported shooter had steeped himself in “leftist ideology.” Indeed, even Robinson’s own words betray his motive. “I had enough of his hatred,” he wrote to his romantic partner, a biological male transitioning to a female. “Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”

 

In sum, Robinson’s grievance was with his target’s political philosophy, so he set out to silence Kirk forever.

 

Cross’s confusion over the ideological motives of Kirk’s killer was hardly the only misconception she broadcast on national television. She maintained, in addition, that, “Since 2001, 85 percent of political deaths have been from right-wing extremists.” That’s a common misconception often promulgated by those on the left who have succumbed to a form of epistemic closure themselves. It’s one that requires a book-length argument to rebut (forgive the shameless plug).

 

But even those who have not researched the figure should question the veracity of a claim that denies the body count attributable to Islamist terror — by far the deadliest form of political terrorism in the United States, dwarfing the carnage caused by both left- and right-wing extremist violence.

 

Cross’s misconception is not hers alone. A cottage industry succeeded in the hours after Kirk’s killing in convincing millions of center-left Americans that Kirk was killed by a right-wing extremist. Many months later, though, you would think that most who were taken in by that campaign of deception would have revised the opinion to which their motivated reasoning led them. And perhaps most have. For some, though, the delusion persists.