You’ve probably seen the clip or the meme by now. It’s one of those soundbites that sets the internet on fire every few months. Charlie Kirk, the face of Turning Point USA, leans into the mic and drops a line that makes half the country nod in agreement and the other half lose their minds. He says he "can’t stand" empathy.
It sounds harsh. Honestly, it sounds borderline robotic if you just read that one sentence. But like most things in our 280-character world, the Charlie Kirk empathy quote full transcript reveals a lot more nuance than a TikTok caption suggests. This wasn't just a random outburst; it was a calculated critique of how we use language in politics.
If we're going to talk about what he actually said, we have to look at the words he used—and the ones he preferred instead.
The Full Transcript: What Was Actually Said?
The comments originally surfaced during an episode of The Charlie Kirk Show on October 12, 2022. Kirk wasn't just ranting about being mean to people. He was actually dissecting the "I feel your pain" era of politics that started back in the 90s.
Here is the transcript of that specific moment:
💡 You might also like: Why the Map of NATO Member Countries is Changing Faster Than You Think
"I can’t stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new-age term, and it does a lot of damage. I much prefer the word compassion, and I much prefer the word sympathy. Empathy is where you try to feel someone’s pain and sorrows as if they’re your own. Compassion allows for understanding. I prefer the word sympathy, because politics has weaponized empathy."
He didn't stop there. He went on to explain that when a politician like Bill Clinton says, "I feel your pain," it’s often a performance. To Kirk, empathy is a "narcissistic" concept because it centers the observer's feelings rather than the victim's needs.
He basically argued that you can’t actually feel someone else’s pain. Trying to do so is a lie. Instead, he argued for sympathy—recognizing someone is hurting and wanting to help—without the "fake" emotional mimicry.
Why the "New Age" Label?
Kirk calling empathy a "made-up, new-age term" raised a lot of eyebrows. Technically, the word empathy is relatively young in the English language compared to sympathy. It entered the lexicon in the early 20th century, adapted from the German word Einfühlung.
But for Kirk, the "new age" label refers to how the term is used in modern DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) circles and therapeutic culture. He views it as a tool used to bypass logic. If you can't "empathize" with a specific group's unique lived experience, your political arguments are often dismissed as "invalid" or "hateful."
💡 You might also like: Why Your Power Outage in Marietta Lasts Longer Than Your Neighbor's
By rejecting the word, he’s rejecting the social contract that requires emotional alignment before a policy can be debated.
Empathy vs. Sympathy: The Core Argument
This is where the debate gets interesting. To a lot of people, these words are interchangeable. To Kirk, they are worlds apart.
- Empathy: "I am feeling what you feel."
- Sympathy: "I see that you are suffering and I care."
Kirk’s point—which he has doubled down on in several interviews—is that empathy is "weaponized." He argues that it leads to "toxic empathy," a term popularized by conservative thinkers like Allie Beth Stuckey. The idea is that if you let empathy drive 100% of your decisions, you might end up making "compassionate" short-term choices that cause long-term disaster.
Think about border policy or criminal justice. From Kirk's perspective, "empathy" for a single individual might lead to a policy that makes a whole community less safe. He thinks sympathy is safer because it keeps your head clear.
The 2025 Context and the "Empathy Trap"
The reason this quote is trending again in early 2026 is largely due to the events of late 2025. Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk in Utah in September 2025, the quote became a lightning rod.
💡 You might also like: Donald Trump at Charlie Kirk Funeral: What Really Happened in Glendale
Critics of Kirk used his own words against him. They argued that if he "couldn't stand" empathy, then they weren't obligated to show any for him or his family. It created a brutal, circular logic on social media.
On the flip side, supporters and some progressive commentators, like those writing for The New Republic or Religion Unplugged, pointed out the "empathy trap." They noted that while Kirk may have rejected the word empathy, the vitriolic reaction to his death proved that society was losing its "shared humanity"—the very thing empathy is supposed to protect.
Did He Have a Point?
Even if you can’t stand Charlie Kirk, his linguistic distinction isn't entirely unique. Paul Bloom, a professor of psychology at Yale, wrote a whole book called Against Empathy. Bloom argues that empathy is a "spotlight" that focuses on one person while ignoring the millions of others who might be affected by a decision.
Kirk’s take is the populist, political version of that academic argument. He’s basically saying, "Don't let your feelings for a specific person's story blind you to the reality of how the world works."
Of course, the counter-argument is that without empathy, we become callous. If you can't even try to "walk a mile in someone's shoes," you end up with the kind of "gridlock of the heart" that defines modern American politics.
Key Takeaways from the Quote
If you’re looking at the Charlie Kirk empathy quote full transcript for a school project or just a heated Thanksgiving debate, here are the facts you need:
- The Source: The Charlie Kirk Show, October 12, 2022.
- The Preference: He prefers "sympathy" and "compassion" because they imply a distance that allows for rational thought.
- The Critique: He believes empathy is used as a political weapon to silence opposition.
- The Context: He was specifically talking about the shift in political messaging from the 1990s to today.
Kirk wasn't advocating for cruelty. He was advocating for a different kind of connection—one that he felt was more honest. Whether that’s a "prudent deal" or a "dangerous lack of humanity" depends entirely on your own worldview.
How to Use This Information
If you're trying to navigate these high-tension political discussions, it helps to be precise with your language. Don't just rely on the headlines. Read the full context of what public figures say—even the ones you dislike—so you can argue against their actual points rather than a caricature.
Next Steps:
- Compare the transcript above with Paul Bloom’s Against Empathy to see the psychological roots of this argument.
- Look up the distinction between "Cognitive Empathy" and "Affective Empathy" to see where Kirk's definitions might be missing the mark.
- Watch the full October 2022 episode on Rumble to hear the tone of the conversation for yourself.