In a social media post that sparked intense controversy, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton endorsed a new book by American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten, drawing sharp criticism from conservatives.

The endorsement from Mrs. Clinton, posted on Wednesday, promoted Weingarten's book Why Fascists Fear Teachers, and came just one week after the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, leading to accusations that such rhetoric fuels political violence, as Fox News reports.

The book, released on Tuesday, explores what Weingarten describes as threats to democracy and public education posed by authoritarian ideologies. According to its preview, it highlights historical patterns of dictators targeting schools and educators. It argues that teachers empower students to think independently, posing a challenge to oppressive regimes.

Clinton's endorsement sparks backlash

Clinton shared her support for the book on social media, congratulating Weingarten on its release. She emphasized the importance of public education as a foundation of democratic values. Her post quickly gained attention, amassing 2 million views on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

In her message, Clinton wrote, "Congratulations to my friend [Weingarten] on 'Why Fascists Fear Teachers.'" She added that attacks on education, like banning books, are tactics of authoritarian control. She also described the book as essential reading for the current political climate.

Conservatives swiftly condemned Clinton’s words, arguing that labeling political opponents as authoritarian contributes to a hostile environment. Many pointed to the timing of her post as particularly insensitive. The criticism intensified due to recent tragic events tied to political tensions.

Timing amid tragedy fuels controversy

The controversy surrounding Clinton's endorsement was heightened by its proximity to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator.

Kirk was murdered exactly one week before Clinton’s post, with authorities stating the shooter held leftist ideological views. This event had already inflamed political divisions across the country.

Republican communicator Matt Whitlock highlighted the timing, stating, "It's been one week since Charlie Kirk was murdered by a lunatic who wrote about 'fascists' on shell casings."

He criticized Weingarten’s book for broadly applying the term to those who oppose her educational policies. Whitlock argued that such language exacerbates existing tensions.

Other conservative figures echoed similar sentiments, linking the rhetoric to the broader atmosphere of hostility. Commentator Corey DeAngelis called the timing of Clinton and Weingarten’s statements "disgusting" following Kirk’s death. Jack Posobiec also noted the one-week mark of the tragedy in his response to Clinton’s post.

Critics question rhetoric's impact on violence

Several conservative voices, including the Republican National Committee, accused Clinton and Weingarten of perpetuating divisive narratives. The RNC remarked that Democrats continue to brand Republicans with inflammatory terms. They suggested that such language shows a lack of restraint even amid recent violence.

Following Kirk’s assassination, some online commentary from individuals on the left celebrated or minimized the event, further fueling conservative claims. Critics argued that repeatedly using charged terms against political opponents could contribute to such attitudes. This perspective gained traction in heated discussions on platforms like X.

Weingarten defended her work against the backlash, insisting it was not meant to inflame tensions. She stated, "Have they read the book? If they did, they’d discover it’s a love letter to teachers."

Book's themes stir broader discussion

The book’s preview frames attacks on education as a historical tactic of oppressive regimes, dating back to various dictatorships. It suggests that controlling curricula and banning literature are common strategies to suppress dissent. The text argues that educators play a vital role in countering such efforts.

Conservative critics, however, took issue with the book’s central premise, questioning the application of historical comparisons to current policy debates. Commentator Andrew Gruel remarked, "They wrote an entire book on a word they don’t even understand." Others, like Chuck Ross, dismissed the narrative outright, urging focus on different priorities.

The debate over Clinton’s endorsement and Weingarten’s book continues to unfold on social media, reflecting deeper divisions in American politics. Fox News Digital reached out to Clinton for comment but received no immediate reply.

As discussions persist, the intersection of rhetoric, violence, and education remains a contentious issue for many.