Higher Learning with Van Lathan and Rachel Lindsay

Episode: The Lionizing of Charlie Kirk With Ryan Grim, Plus Malik B on Viral Comedy
Date: September 23, 2025
Host: The Ringer

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into current debates in Black culture, politics, and free speech. Van and Rachel analyze mainstream efforts to "lionize" Charlie Kirk following his assassination, questioning the media’s reframing of his controversial legacy. Special guest Ryan Grim (Breaking Points, Dropsite News) joins for a robust debate about coverage of Kirk’s death, platforming dangerous ideas, and the growing normalization of political violence. Later, comedian and actor Malik B enters for a wide-ranging, candid discussion about the world of comedy, viral skits, and the realities behind being a modern stand-up.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Opening Banter: Aging, Generational Gaps, and Stream-of-Consciousness (00:02–11:10)

• Van and Rachel reflect on feeling “auntie/Unk” versus generational youthfulness, with classic playful banter.
• A meandering but honest discussion about aging, medication, and Black family dynamics signals their intent to “start in love” and highlight how generational perspectives affect contemporary debates.

Memorable Moment:
Van joking about being a “grand Unk” and reflecting on generational disconnects:

“He's 35, though, and he still asked me about different stuff. I'm like, God damn. So his little homies… I'm their grand unk. Okay?” (03:21)

2. Gilded Age TV, Cultural Politics, and Setting up the Main Theme (11:10–13:33)

• Light transition as Van and Rachel discuss their obsession with HBO’s The Gilded Age, drawing parallels between old and modern social stratifications.
• Rachel:

“She didn't grow up in this society, so she doesn't adhere to the rules… She can see through what the rules are because she didn’t grow up in that place.” (09:49)

3. The Value and Limits of Platforming Opposing Ideas (13:33–29:00)

• Rachel: She questions the ethics of platforming individuals like Candace Owens, who “just lie” and do not provide authentic discourse.

  “I’d never want to have her on here because I don’t want to have people on who just lie… It feels performative. I'm not going to have a performative conversation. I'm just not.” (13:33)

• Van: Argues that democracy and progress demand confrontation with opposing and “offensive” ideas so they can be directly challenged, not just censored.

  “There's a laziness to not putting your ideas in a forum where they can be questioned, where you can have tension. There's a laziness to it.” (24:21)

  This exchange touches on cancel culture, the marketplace of ideas, and the difference between government suppression and social or market consequences.

• Rachel discusses fear as a motivator for avoiding tough conversations:

  “People are afraid to cause... as those things are challenged, there's a fear of disrupting everything that they already knew… Sometimes people would rather live in what feels easy to them than to challenge what they've already been taught. And I think that's fear.” (27:44)

4. Main Interview: Ryan Grim on Charlie Kirk, Media Whitewashing, and Political Violence (35:47–83:28)

a. Setting the Stage: Why Critique the Coverage? (37:01–43:12)

• Van challenges Ryan Grim (Breaking Points) on what he perceives as an overly soft, “laundering” narrative about Charlie Kirk after his death, playing back several of Kirk’s inflammatory soundbites.
• Van:

  "Why the interest in laundering the reputation or rhetoric of Charlie Kirk?" (45:51)

• Ryan clarifies their goal was to get the factual record correct, not defend Kirk, but admits it may unintentionally whitewash his legacy.

b. Limitations of Moral Equivalence (59:12–68:06)

• Van:

  "If the fact that anybody might be scared of political violence … is going to be used as sort of a catch all not to tell the truth, that’s going to fall on deaf ears with black people… We want [the Left] to be unafraid to tell the truth. Because when white America is … afraid to tell the truth about the condition of black people, then their fear ends up in our death." (59:14)

• Ryan concedes he may have “overcorrected” in those immediate post-assassination days, but still feels precision and caution are warranted amid rising political violence.

c. Both-Sidesism & the Real Asymmetry in Political Violence (63:36–66:45)

• Van and Rachel press Ryan for concrete examples of the Left advocating violence (beyond social media bots), underscoring the real, statistical disparity between right-wing and left-wing political violence.
• Rachel points out:

  “…when violence, political violence is committed, it is from way more than one side than the other. So that is actual proof you can point to…” (65:53)

d. Was Charlie Kirk’s Debate Style Good for Democracy? (68:06–72:02)

• Rachel and Van argue that Kirk’s campus antics (viral “debate me” clips) were not “civil discourse”—they were racially antagonistic and gaslighting.
• Ryan agrees:

  “I doubt it. And I think it probably did swing campuses to the right, but should the left be doing that?... It’s not really getting you anywhere. What he's getting is, you know, viral clips…” (68:44)

e. Refusing to Whitewash: Drawing the Line With Legacy (72:02–76:05)

• Van’s strongest point:

  “There’s a truth here. The truth is … Charlie Kirk was an asshole. And there is not going to be any amount of whitewashing, lionizing, talking about it… If we do that, then what we do is cede so much intellectual power for someone else to talk and comport themselves in that exact same way and be completely let off the hook for it.” (74:46)

• Ryan eventually acknowledges the importance of calling out the “martyring” and “lionization” of Kirk, especially as the right attempts to frame him as a hero akin to MLK.

f. Wider Context: Violence as a Political Reality for Marginalized Communities (83:28–88:39)

• Van connects persistent, structural violence against Black and marginalized people to America’s political system, refusing to allow the current wave of overt political violence to overshadow the daily, systemic danger their communities face.
• Ryan is thanked for the candor and resilience in facing tough questions.

5. Post-Interview Analysis: Solidarity and the Problem with “OG’s” (89:01–127:42)

a. Van Jones, Good Faith Dialogues, and the Dangers of Exception Making (90:00–102:05)

• Rachel rips Van Jones for publicizing a private, conciliatory message from Charlie Kirk—seeing it as self-serving and damaging to Black solidarity.

  “That in no way helped out what Black people were trying to say … It makes you look a certain way… It was performative. You had a whole…sit down with Anderson Cooper. It was a moment that turned into something about you.” (94:20–102:05)

• Van agrees, warning Black public figures that their proximity to power and access is not the same “respect” shown to their community.

b. Stephen A. Smith and Acting "Accordingly" (103:13–115:11)

• Rachel and Van respond to a clip of Stephen A. Smith urging people to “act accordingly” in the Trump era.
  • Rachel: “You cannot be fair and balanced when you are working for a company that's paying you nine, reportedly nine figures.”
  • Van: “Acting accordingly … can only be interpreted as, don’t talk too loud. Massa is mad. Do not listen to that. That right there is part of the plan.” (103:41–106:36)
• They clarify respect is due for taking high-leverage risks (e.g. Jamel Hill, Mark Lamont Hill).

c. Democratic Leadership and the Futility of “Principled” Opposition (116:28–127:42)

• The hosts express frustration with the Democratic establishment (Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer) for supporting “Charlie Kirk Day,” highlighting the gap between party symbolism and true advocacy for Black and working-class Americans.

  “If you're too direct and biting in your criticism of the Democratic Party as a structure, then you give way. … But my question is…what the fuck we supposed to do with them?” (121:58)

• Rachel details the specifics of who did and didn’t vote for the resolution, distinguishing between voting “present” as silent protest and actually voting “no.”

6. Culture Segment: Infinite Coles, Fatherhood, and Healing (127:59–137:03)

• Van discusses the queer rapper Infinite Coles and his fraught relationship with his father, Ghostface Killah, interpreting his new song as “a boy reaching out for his father.”
• Emotional reflection:

  “Having lost my father and had to contend with his eternal absence, I have to contend with who he really was…it just didn’t have anything to do with me… Anybody that's not in that position, I envy them.” (129:40–136:50)

7. Comedy Conversation with Malik B: The Reality of Virality (140:48–179:51)

a. Breakout Moments in Acting and Comedy (142:18–151:53)

• Malik tells his unique transition from boxer to actor, getting into Creed by, literally, beating up an audition rival.
• He segues from acting (his one line in Creed was cut) to stand-up, opening up about finding vulnerability as the key to connecting with audiences.

b. Going Viral and the Stand-up vs. Skits World (156:38–163:08)

• Malik explains the grind: stand-up came first, skits followed as a viral necessity.
• Discusses the differences in “reps” versus years, and the learning curve for blending content creator skills with live comedy.

c. Oversaturation and Social Media’s Double-Edged Sword (162:24–163:08)

• Malik: “I want these people to fail. … Why did you put that stand up clip out? … But if it's not funny, you just gonna keep posting?”

d. Pretty Comics & Breaking Type (163:08–166:09)

• Van raises the “problem” of the rise of good-looking standup comics (e.g., Matt Rife):

  “It's hard to trust a good looking standup comic…to me I feel like you on the stage talking about how tough this life is for you and I’m like, man, ain’t tough for you.” (165:00)

• Malik and Rachel reject the idea that looks determine comedic authenticity.

e. Comedy, Free Speech, and Club Culture (171:16–177:25)

• Malik: Comedy clubs are adapting by taking phones and protecting new material, but open mics are still wild and risky.
• CP (comedian) and Donnell Rawlings praised as underhyped but brilliant.

8. BREAKING NEWS: Jimmy Kimmel Returns (180:17–185:35)

• The hosts react in real time to ABC reinstating Jimmy Kimmel Live after its brief suspension. Both see it as a small but meaningful win against censorship and for free speech.

  “Preserving free speech and subverting the FCC’s and Donald Trump’s ability to pick and choose who's on TV and who says what…that’s a win.” (183:44)

• Rachel: Happy staffers keep their jobs, highlighting the real world impact of free speech battles.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Van: “There's a laziness to not putting your ideas in a forum where they can be questioned… There's a laziness to it.” (24:21)
• Rachel: “It's fear. … What if I learn that everything I've always knew is not true?” (27:44)
• Van: “We cannot allow it, won't allow it to happen. That's not going to happen. That's why we have microphones.” (57:04)
• Van: “If the fact that anybody might be scared of political violence…is going to be used as sort of a catch all not to tell the truth, that’s going to fall on deaf ears with black people.” (59:14)
• Ryan Grim: “Maybe I overcorrected, but I wanted to draw a pretty hard line on that point [condemning political violence].” (78:53)
• Rachel (about Van Jones): “It was performative. You had a whole…sit down… It was a moment that turned into something about you.” (102:05)
• Van: “Don't listen to that. Acting accordingly…can only be interpreted as, don't talk too loud. Massa is mad. Do not listen to that.” (103:41)
• Rachel: “You cannot be fair and balanced when you are working for a company that's paying you…nine figures.” (107:29)
• Rachel (on Democratic leaders): “Those days are over. Nobody’s patting you on the back and giving you a hand clap because you wrote the letter.” (121:58)
• Van (on Charlie Kirk): “Charlie Kirk was an asshole. And there is not going to be any amount of whitewashing, lionizing, talking about it…” (74:46)
• Malik B (on oversaturation): “I want these people to fail. … It’s oversaturated. … If it's not funny, you just gonna keep posting…?” (162:24)
• Van (on Infinite Coles & fatherhood): "All I saw, even in the video, is a boy reaching out for his father…" (129:40)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Podcast Opening/Anecdotes: 00:02–11:10
• Gilded Age TV & Theme Setup: 11:10–13:33
• Free Speech, Platforming, and Candace Owens Debate: 13:33–29:00
• Ryan Grim Interview Starts: 35:47
  • Van challenges Breaking Points’ coverage: 37:01
  • Charlie Kirk soundbites & real-time analysis: 37:37–44:22
  • Affirmative action, racism, and Lionizing arguments: 43:31–57:04
  • Political violence & both-sideism debate: 59:12–68:06
  • Debate style and campus organizing: 68:06–72:02
  • Reflections on legacy and solidarity: 72:02–83:28
• Post-interview OGs/Leadership segment: 89:01–127:42
• Infinite Coles & Fatherhood: 127:59–137:03
• Malik B Segment (Comedy & Virality): 140:48–179:51
• Breaking: Jimmy Kimmel Returns, Show Reaction: 180:17–185:35

Conclusion & Takeaways

• Van and Rachel offer one of their most passionate and honest episodes to date, refusing to allow the whitewashing of Charlie Kirk’s legacy while championing the necessity of hard debate over easy silence
• They confront well-known figures (Van Jones, Stephen A. Smith, Hakeem Jeffries) for what they see as self-serving or cowardly responses in the face of crisis.
• Guest Ryan Grim offers essential perspective on the dilemmas journalists face in the current American landscape, even as Van and Rachel push him for clarity and accountability.
• Malik B’s segment celebrates the continued evolution, resilience, and challenges of Black comedy, underscored by a focus on authenticity, vulnerability, and hustle in an oversaturated field.

Overall Tone: Unfiltered honesty, sharp wit, cultural urgency, generational pride, and unwavering commitment to telling inconvenient truths.