Good kid,mad city: On the political meaning of Kyle Rittenhouse

Abstract

On August 25th, 2020, Kyle Rittenhouse killed two people during a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, reigniting debate around the legitimacy of violence done in the defense of property. Media coverage of the incident frequently related Rittenhouse’s violent acts most explicitly to the police and police power. While more liberally aligned media outlets like CNN and the New York Times quickly delegitimized his actions as those of an unsanctioned non-state actor. The Conservative wing of US media heralded Rittenhouse as a hero and a “good kid” who took it upon himself to bring order to a “mad city” in the throes of “destructive riots.” From either vantage, the Rittenhouse case underscores important elements of the American politics of security. This project analyzes Rittenhouse’s violent actions, his legitimation in the courtroom and media, and his subsequent celebrity to establish his meaning to contemporary politics. In this case, self-preservation, an animating idea of American liberalism undergirds his legitimacy. Rittenhouse is but one of a long line of agents who enact violence with tacit approval of police, and it is via the notion of self-preservation, embedded in America’s founding mythologies and cultural productions that self-deputized subjects continue to successfully defend and legitimize their violent acts.