In his life’s work, Charlie Kirk, the rising star in conservative politics, did not give me, or millions of Americans like me in the political center or left, a great deal of optimism about the direction of our nation’s partisan politics.

But his brutal assassination, captured in horrific video images none of us can unsee, poses a dire threat to our democracy, and it is the duty of all of us, regardless of political loyalty, to renounce and defuse any further political violence.

I didn’t wish violence on Charlie Kirk. Nobody I respect, or even know, wished for it.

Quite the opposite. I actually appreciated Kirk’s success at motivating young people — mostly disenchanted and disengaged young men — to engage in politics as a means to building the nation they wanted to live in.

Kirk’s energy, dedication and talent in that direction were truly impressive. What, I sometimes wondered, were the folks on my side of the political divide doing to reach out to the young in this way? Who was our movement builder?

Kirk is gone, and I know what that must feel like to his friends and admirers on the right. But we have had more than enough wacky politically motivated violence in recent times.

We have barely recovered emotionally from the June assassinations of Minnesota Rep. Melissa Hortman, her husband, Mark, as well as the attempted assassination of Minnesota State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, and daughter Hope.

Hortman and Hoffman were Democrats, as were most of the 70 potential targets found on a list compiled by the suspected assassin, Vance Luther Boelter.

Boelter was indicted in July by a federal grand jury on six counts, some of which carry the death penalty. We don’t know his motive, although it seems to have been political.

But I’m unaware of any Democratic politician or voice with any reach in American politics that called for reprisal for his crime with violence.

As I write this, news is trickling out about the suspected assassin. His profile does not quite match the one imagined in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. That has cooled some of the rhetoric, and I hope this trend continues.

As someone who has promoted free speech, regardless of which side is trying to speak out, I hope that Democrats and Republicans can approach this crisis with compassion, humility and self-reflection, and even learn some things from the other side.

Remember that California Gov. Gavin Newsom invited Kirk to be the first guest on the Democratic governor’s “This is Gavin Newsom” podcast in March. Among other interesting things that emerged from that encounter was Newsom’s admission that his 13-year-old son wanted to stay home from school to meet Kirk, whom he followed on TikTok.

I understand. My own adult son has become my unofficial right-wing political adviser, filling me in on who Kirk was and how he seems to have more pull with a feisty, irreverent sector of the “manosphere” than the more conventional pols (who are better known to an old geezer like me).

But as an old geezer, I remember the sort of tit-for-tat violence that plagued this country in the 1960s — and I dread its possible return. A wave of anti-war and civil rights protests turned into assassinations of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, and the shooting of George Wallace, among other casualties.

I have no desire to see the return of such eruptions.