Permission Structures: How the Left Manufactures Moral Justification for Violence
“The political Left has created structures that grant moral permission for violence, especially when directed at their ideological opponents.”
— Ben Shapiro, The Ben Shapiro Show, Ep. 2280
In the days following Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Ben Shapiro introduced a term that goes far deeper than political commentary. He called it a “permission structure.” And according to Shapiro, it’s one of the Left’s most dangerous weapons. Not because it’s loud, but because it’s ambient. Because it works in the background.
It’s how violence becomes justifiable. Not legally, but morally.
And it’s happening right now.
What Shapiro Means by “Permission Structure”
In Shapiro’s usage, a permission structure refers to the cultural, rhetorical, and institutional environment that quietly makes certain behaviors or beliefs feel acceptable—even noble.
It’s not the same as direct incitement. The Left doesn’t come out and say: “Attack Charlie Kirk.”
Instead, they create a framework where it feels acceptable—even heroic—to dehumanize, silence, or even eradicate someone like Charlie Kirk.
This is how it works:
You brand your opponents not just as wrong, but as evil.
You label their speech not just offensive, but “violent.”
You call their presence not just controversial, but “unsafe.”
You say their ideas aren't debate-worthy, they're “literal fascism.”
Then you watch what happens when someone takes those ideas to their logical conclusion.
You don’t have to tell someone to pull the trigger. You just have to tell them their target is subhuman.
The Left’s Role in Building These Structures
Shapiro argues that the Left has spent the last decade, particularly post-2016, building a cultural ecosystem that does exactly this.
1. Language as Moral License
When college professors, media outlets, and elected officials casually refer to mainstream conservatives as “Nazis,” “fascists,” or “threats to democracy,” that’s not just hyperbole. It’s permission.
It reframes your ideological opponents as existential enemies. And once someone believes they’re fighting evil itself, anything becomes justified.
2. Selective Outrage
When a right-winger says something edgy, the media explodes. When a leftist literally assaults someone—or cheers on a murder—silence.
Shapiro says this double standard is a key ingredient in how permission structures work. When the public sees the Left excuse or ignore their side’s radicalism, the signal is clear: this is allowed.
3. The Victimhood Hierarchy
Shapiro frequently critiques the Left’s elevation of identity-based victimhood into moral superiority. In this framework, marginalized identity + left-wing ideology = virtue. Meanwhile, conservative, religious, straight, male voices = oppressors.
And if someone views themselves as oppressed by default, and Charlie Kirk as the face of their oppression, then even violence can feel like “justice.”
“They believe being offended gives them license to attack.”
— Shapiro, Ep. 2280
The Test Case: Charlie Kirk’s Death
Charlie Kirk’s assassination wasn’t random. It was the first political assassination in decades to be:
Committed in broad daylight
During a live event
Captured on video
Followed by social media celebrations from left-wing users
And the press? They mostly shrugged.
No profiles of the killer. No analysis of “radicalization.”
Why? Because permission structures don’t just encourage violence.
They also protect the ideology behind it.
Why Shapiro’s Concept Matters
Shapiro’s argument is that political violence doesn’t arise in a vacuum. It grows in a culture that:
Dehumanizes opponents
Rewards moral absolutism
Excuses certain forms of rage
Calls silence “complicity” but practices silence when it suits them
And the result is what we saw in Utah:
A young man, reportedly steeped in far-left ideology and LGBTQ radicalism, waited for the right moment and fired the shot that killed Charlie.
The Red Sheet’s Perspective
Shapiro’s idea of “permission structures” gives us a framework not just for understanding what happened to Charlie Kirk, but for recognizing the deeper rot beneath the surface.
Political violence doesn’t start with a weapon.
It starts with a sentence.