If you want to label it "political violence," you should also note the imbalance — far more comes from the right than the left, irrespective of efforts to paint it otherwise or to argue "both sides." The accusation that it is all antifa and the radical left is particularly egregious. It is a dog whistle for (more) violence and crackdown against liberal reforms, let alone those on the far left. It is authoritarianism in plain site.
archive.ph/iALcQ via The Economist

reshared this

in reply to Rich Stein (he/him)

Political violence is exploited by and called for by the right far more than by the left. The left is accused of political violence far more often without evidence — and the right hears those accusations but rarely considers that it is not true. davidrothkopf.substack.com/p/e…
in reply to Rich Stein (he/him)

Leadership starts at the top. If POTUS dog whistles for violence, it will happen — where and how is all that remains uncertain. trump has the power to not fan the flames of violence of all kinds — political and otherwise. He can turn down the rhetoric and call for less violence. He should do so. Will he?
This entry was edited (3 months ago)
in reply to Rich Stein (he/him)

US government data. Report published by the US government. Usual caveats.
"... Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives. In this same period, far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives..."

Supposedly this report is now blocked by US DoJ, thus the archive link. I have not checked.
archive.is/1t1rm

This entry was edited (3 months ago)

Karel Brits 🔻 reshared this.