From Breitbart to Today's Challenges: Some Ideas from The Past

It's September 10, 2025, and the news of Charlie Kirk's assassination has just come out. He was speaking at a university event when it happened. As someone nearing 60, I've followed his work for years, starting from his first article on Breitbart in 2012 about bias in school textbooks. That piece came during a time when I was active in those same online discussions, commenting as Federalist2. Let me share a bit about how those early conversations led to some ideas that might be useful for younger folks today.

Back in 2008, after my father passed away at 70, I started looking into why he felt socialism had cost him his investments and shortened his life. He blamed policies that removed incentives, leaving people like him without recourse. That led me to Breitbart.com, where Andrew Breitbart had built a site for unfiltered conservative talk. From 2008 to 2014, I spent evenings in the comment sections, debating policy with others. We covered everything from limited government to countering media bias. It was straightforward: Breitbart would post articles, and we'd discuss them, often late into the night.

Out of those talks came a set of writings I called Federalist 2.0, updating the original Federalist Papers for modern times. We focused on human nature and governance. For example, one article explained that people are born with freewill, which can't be taken away but can be limited by bad laws. Another looked at how passions lead to conflicts over needs, from basic survival to self-fulfillment, and how justice should preserve freedom without forcing fairness. We also discussed reason and virtue as tools to make solid decisions, drawing from old philosophers like the Greeks and Christians.

By 2010, we'd put together a unified theory linking philosophy, politics, and economics. It breaks down how societies balance internal elements like beliefs and skills (what we called providentia, or foresight) with external ones like markets and liberty (oportunitas, or opportunity). A diagram we made shows four quadrants: Systems where government controls risks lead to tyranny and low wealth, while those respecting individual choices lead to freedom and growth. It's all based on observations from history, not ideals. Within a few short months, we were able to use this philosophy with abandon, leveraging it to the point any left leaning perspective was easily extinguished.

Charlie Kirk's early article fit right into that era's discussions on Breitbart. He was 18, calling out education biases, and it sparked more debates about protecting free thought. His later work with Turning Point USA carried a similar spirit—questioning authority, promoting limited government, and encouraging young people to act.

These ideas from back then are available at federalist2.com including the articles and diagrams. They're worth a look if you're thinking about how to handle today's issues, like campus debates or policy fights. Charlie's approach showed the value in starting young and staying persistent. If anything, these ideas most likely instilled a believe system and mechanism for his success. So, if any of this connects with what he stood for, it might help in your own discussions.

Publius from Federalist 2.0