For years, far-right extremists and jihadists have mostly been linked to the majority of lethal political violence and terrorism in the U.S. Examples date back to the deadly Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 and the Pulse nightclub shooting in 2016, as noted by researchers.
However, recent analyses suggest there’s been a notable increase in violent acts conducted by individuals with explicitly leftist views, those lacking a clear political alignment, or those who blend different fringe ideologies. This includes various individuals behind high-profile incidents, such as the shooting of a UnitedHealthcare executive last December and the assassin believed responsible for the killing of two Israeli diplomats in Washington last May.
Take Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old from Utah held accountable for the shooting death of conservative figure Charlie Kirk. Reports indicate that in the year leading up to the incident, he developed progressive sentiments, leaning more towards pro-gay and trans rights philosophy. His mother, a registered Republican, made these statements to officials, as described by Utah County Attorney Jeffrey Gray.
In texts sent to his romantic partner—who is undergoing gender transition—Robinson expressed his justification for the murder, saying Kirk promoted excessive hatred.
“The violence against Charlie Kirk is a tragic event for our nation,” remarked Gray.
Insights into political violence and domestic terrorism in the U.S. are somewhat scarce regarding comprehensive data collection. Various academic groups monitor such activities but often arrive at different definitions and methodologies. While most research up until fairly recently concluded that right-wing and jihadist activities prevailed against left-wing violence, signs of change are becoming apparent.
“Currently, we witness substantial political violence from both left and right,” mentioned Robert Pape, a political science professor at the University of Chicago. His research, which he team’s compiled over several decades, surveyed motivations behind political violence and resulted in some striking observations.
Political violence has shifted in intensity since the founding of the U.S, with time-altering fluctuations affecting who commits these acts along the political spectrum. During the volatile 1960s, notable figures such as civil rights lawyers, John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Malcolm X fell victim to violence. Moreover, there was an attempted assassination against George Wallace, a presidential contender, in 1972 that left him paralyzed.
Pape noted that while left-wing extremists were primarily responsible for political violence during the early 70s, Dominance by right-wing factions increased substantially afterwards, remaining so until about 2017-2018. These days, it’s getting complex, with violence emerging from individuals across the ideological spectrum. “This rising wave of violent populism isn’t going away quietly; it will likely become more extreme before improving,” Pape commented in a recent Wall Street Journal interview.
Understanding what catalyzes attacks on political figures has become paramount, especially considering the recent threats to public safety. Former President Trump survived one assassination attempt in July 2024 and faced another plotted threat weeks later. Similarly, a gunman became embroiled in a fatal double shooting involving a Democratic lawmaker from Minnesota and her spouse earlier this June.
Before the recent Kirk shooting, the Justice Department had been exploring these trends, with an available study on domestic terrorism through its National Institute of Justice. The report provided data showing that since 1990, instances attributed to far-right extremists surpassed those connected to the far-left, tallying over 520 deceptions against 78 left-leaning incidents. However, the availability of this report appears problematic in the wake of last week’s shooting as the government has since removed it from their site. The Justice Department didn’t offer further commentary on the situation.
An expansive survey assessing political extremism selected data from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, housed at the University of Maryland. The findings indicated that from 1948-2018, far-right extremists and jihadists exhibited around twice the likelihood of engaging in violence compared to their left-wing counterparts, with 560 ideologically motivated violent incidents by rightists versus about 120 from leftists.
Gary LaFree, a criminologist and co-author of the study, mentioned that left-wing violence diminished significantly after the 1970s era when groups like the Weather Underground were active. Although organizations like antifa did experience turbulence through destructive property damage claims, substantial evidence tying them to marked violent attacks remains sparse, the researcher commented.
Peter Bergen, subscribed to a liberal think tank named New America as vice president for global studies and fellows, observed the post-9/11 trends stating lethal violence initiated by left-wing individuals has been historically lower compared to right-wing activity. However, he warned that the phenomenon had emerged before in the 1970s, meaning it has the potential to resurface.
After the Kirk incident, the libertarian Cato Institute presented numbers to indicate politically motivated killings in America are generally infrequent. The data shows a total of 3,599 lives lost to politically edged terrorism in America between January 1, 1975, and present day; disturbingly, at least 81 of these cases have transpired since 2020. Of these violent crimes, around 87% fell to Islamic extremists, 11% to right-wing radicals, and 2% linked to left-wing attacks, as often defined.
A different breakdown excluding the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001, revealed that right-wing perpetrators were responsible for 63% of fatalities with only 10% from those affiliated with the left-wing.
Cato’s definition of right-wing terrorists encompasses a range of ideologies, including white supremacy and anti-abortion perspectives, while left-wing attackers spanned motivations around Black nationalism, antipolice sentiments, animal rights, communism, among others.
“Murder based on political motives is intolerable, equally weighty as all murders, but even more damaging due to its societal ramifications,” remarked Alex Nowrasteh from Cato, who orchestrated economic and social policy studies. Moreover, he conceded an unsettling aspect where ‘motivated’ analysts might manipulate the figures by composing different narratives concerning inarguable attacker’s motivations.
Recently both Utah’s Republican Gov. Spencer Cox and Colorado’s Democratic Gov. Jared Polis called out for an urgent resolution towards softening acerbic political exchanges.
“We have the option to respond to violence with more violence or escalate hatred with more hatred,” Cox was quoted saying on Friday. “That’s the knockout point with political violence; it expands into something heavier as both sides deflect blame. We need to brainstorm for solutions before it deteriorates drastically.”
For any comments or inquiries, reach out to Cameron McWhirter at Cameron.McWhirter@wsj.com and Zusha Elinson at zusha.elinson@wsj.com.
