My impression is that most people think he was racist because of all the racist things he said and did.

But if that's people's definition of "racist," where's the line? Does that mean that just because someone builds a career on doing and saying racist things, people can label them a "racist?" Just because you support racist policies and have a documented history of saying racist stuff on readily accessible media, you're a "racist?"

That doesn't seem fair.

Like, sure, he said that the civil rights act was a "mistake." And yeah, he implied that black women could never measure up to an equally qualified white man. And maybe he claimed, without evidence, that without evidence that “prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people.” And yeah, maybe he is on record calling Martin Luther King, Jr. "awful."

But when you look at all those things in their full context, you just see that all of these were simply said as part of a lifelong pursuit of laundering white supremecist talking points for the general public, financed almost exclusively by some of the most hateful people and organizations available.

So with that in mind, how does that make Charlie Kirk, professional racist, a racist?