I think there also needs to be a measure for "incoherent psychotic nut" that covers some of these guys, at least partially. E.g. "60% Right-wing, 40% psychotic nut."
Like, in what sense is this guy "right-wing"? (Matthew Riehl, 2017)
He is categorized as such above, but if he were really on the Right, I'm sure that the NYT and Wiki would have made an effort to point that out.
One also should make an effort quantify the degree of public support for these things. Many, many people (doctors, teachers, etc.) are happy to offer public support to lefty killers like Luigi Mangione and Tyler Robinson, under their own names.
Whereas as someone who's been heavily online and following the Right on Twitter/X for many years, I've literally never -- NEVER -- seen cheers for a right-wing murderer online. One can't find pro-murder right-wing sentiment on public social media, one has to seek it out in the murky depths of group chats, Telegram, 4chan, etc.
I conclude that the public base of support for left-wing murder is significantly larger than that for right-wing murder.
Many on the right were cheerleaders for people like George Zimmerman, Daniel Penny, the people who killed Ahmaud Arbery. They also support Derek Chauvin and Daniel Perry.
They also love George Tiller's murderer and have supported Timothy McVeigh. So I don't know what you are getting at. The right wing literally has shown support for murderers. Including those found guilty and are locked up.
No one is cheerleading Tyler Robinson either, but many don't give a shit about Charlie Kirk's death either.
The right are also people that love to turn everything into a conspiracy theory to avoid blame. They don't defend the murder of the two democrats in Minnesota, they just make stuff up that the shooter is actually a lefty working for Tim Walz.
The right refuses to accept reality, they think Timothy McVeigh was set up
Support for something is irrelevant. The right wing are far more violent and commit far more political murders and political violence than the left.
This post requires many assumptions, one of the most easily defeated is that no one is cheerleading tyler robinson. A simple trip to reddit and or bluesky demonstrates this rapidly. Another assumption is that the ADL's leftist bias and flawed methodologies in their extremism study doesn't negate it's efficacy. There have been independent audits of the study that find the ADL to over report right wing extremism.
Over-report right wing? Because the data consistently shows right-wing violence to be far more prevalent that the United States and other countries had to created agencies to track and address the problem. They don’t only track right wing violence, they track all violence and categorize it based on motives. This guy doing this analysis is a solid right winger and went out of his way to give right wing the benefit of the doubt.
So now that the US under Trump is creating agencies to track left wing violence, that's an indication that leftist violence is the bigger problem, right?
I never said that there weren’t people cheerleading Tyler Robinson, but conservatives have cheerleader, many murderers, including those convicted of murder because they think that the jury or judges were liberal or some other nonsense.
The Anti-Defamation League is not leftist and it has supported many Republican politicians and many Republican policies like anti-BDS laws and also numerous other organizations including those that track terrorism and political extremism have confirmed that for right extremism is far more prevalent and four more deadly. These are just the facts.
There’s been no reporting that shows the ADL over samples right wing. Those claims come from conservative sources that want to claim neo-Nazis are somehow left wing whenever every historian scholar and expert knows and says that neo-Nazis are right wing
It does not really matter but you did say “No one is chearleading Tyler Robinson” some people are included in No one. Some people on the right chearlead “Their side”, and some people on the left chearlead “Their side”.
Daniel Penny wasn’t engaging in self defense. He was never Attacked. The person he killed was having a mental breakdown, but did not physically attack anyone, but because he was yelling that gave Daniel Penny the justification to kill him. But I don’t think it was justification and it certainly wasn’t self defense.
Derek Chauvin was literally convicted of murder. There was no self-defense. It was straight up murder and since he was a police officer, it was state sanctioned murder.
Daniel Perry who was pardoned by the Texas governor literally called for violence and stated online that he wanted to do violence to Black Lives Matter protesters, and then he attempted to run them over with his car and when he crashed, the protesters approached the car and he shot and killed one of the protesters that wasn’t self-defense
Conservatives defended the murder of the black guy in Georgia because they claimed he was breaking in the houses when he wasn’t the killers were convicted of murder.
The only person that you can claim self-defense was George Zimmerman but the reason I mentioned him was because he ignored police orders to not follow him which he ignored and followed Trayvon Martin.
Conservatives side with the police nearly every time they kill a black person even when the black person wasn’t even resisting arrest or was even being arrested. Examples include Tamir Rice, John Crawford, and Philando Castile.
I’m a very honest person, which is why I didn’t include Kyle Rittenhouse, who I believe did use self defense but the other examples I gave we’re not self defense
Bullshit. Penny killed a homeless person who was having mental health issues but the homeless person never attacked anyone and never harmed anyone. I live in LA, I've seen many homeless people, I've been on public transportation where there's been homeless people having mental health issues, I keep my distance but I never felt like I needed to go and murder someone because they are yelling or having a mental health issue.
Same goes for Chaining. Same thing.
You people are deranged and you all think you are in some video game or some shit. Unfair system my ass. Penny and Chaining aren't victims, you people aren't victims.
You raise an interesting point. We might classify “public support” but also “public indignation.” The main evidence for Tyler Robinson being a “lefty” is that CK was a “righty.” Cue the internet mobs, right-wing in this case. So the motivation of the killer is not really important. What is important is how any faction uses the event as a pretext to demonize “them.” It doesn’t need to be murder, of course. The Sidney Sweeney thing was an hilarious example of this. If the event fits your narrative, great. If it doesn’t you can always imagine a conspiracy to make it fit.
Conservatives are such hypocrites. When it comes to gun laws, your pro-gun ideology claims it’s not the gun’s fault, it’s the person. Now that there’s a person who shoots a conservative, you claim it’s not the person’s fault, it’s the fault of the left ideology. Make up your frickin mind!
Does Trump "lean left?" He called Harris a fascist several times a week during the campaign. We know CK had a coherent (if repugnant to many) world view. TR seems to be a jumble of shallow "feelz."
He only called Harris a fascist in the context of her calling him that:
> Referring to Democrats, Trump added: “They use that word — really, it’s both words. ‘He’s Hitler.’ And then they say, ‘He’s a Nazi.’” “I’m not a Nazi,” Trump said. “I’m the opposite of a Nazi.” Trump also responded to Harris calling him a fascist by saying, “She’s a fascist, OK? She’s a fascist.”
Except today in the United States it is the right that is actively using fascist language and actions, starting from the President down. When we have lawmakers and White House advisors praising and using Nazi rhetoric - that is the last word on this argument of who is anti-fascist.
"Antifacism" as a term has been co-opted by the left in recent years. Plus there are the accounts from friends and family about the suspect's political leanings.
Is it possible that he carved those as a deflection from his own leanings, especially if this whole "Groyper" thing is shown to be true? Or is that something that can easily be explained away as "something the radical left would do?"
Relatives and friends describe the shooter as leaning left politically. Relatives and friends also describe the trans boyfriend as leaning left politically.
If you're "heavily" following the right online and Twitter (which is now heavily right-wing) how would you see cheers for a ring-winger being murdered? And what do you mean by "pro-murder right-wing sentiment"? You mean like the president pardoning all of the insurrectionists? And how the GOP and right-wingers continually try to describe that as "peaceful protest" and that they didn't do anything wrong? I'd call that cheers for right-wing murder online, in the news, on the radio, tv and everywhere else. Lying about or dismissing a terrorism attack or murder is the same as approving of it.
Anti-government really needs to be sectioned off from "right-wing". It's otherwise really bizarre that you have aggressively statist (national socialist) ideologies in the same bracket as aggressively anti-statist ones.
The guy that shot up the Tree of Life synagogue hated Trump because he has a Jewish daughter, son-in-law, and granddaughter. The connection of these individuals to the mainstream Republican Party is tenuous.
OTOH, trans activism is a tentpole for the modern Democratic Party.
The guy who shot up the tree of life was a far right extremist. It does not matter that he hated Trump. Nick Fuentes also hates Trump so what’s your point?
The tree of life shooter expressed antisemitic, but also anti-immigrant anti-black and other far right views
Trans Activism isn’t fringe. Trans activism are people, human beings, fellow Americans who just want to live peacefully without hate and discrimination.
What you are saying is that civil rights activism is fringe. You’re part of the problem. 35+ trans people are murdered in the US every year for being trans and that’s an undercount. Government has stripped away much of their civil liberties, freedoms, and bodily automany while painting them as some violent fringe group.
FYI Hitler burned down and murdered the only trans clinic in Germany at that time and killed those who worked there
Any activism on the right is also frequently deemed fringe / extremist / domestic terrorist.
Right wing activists are people, human beings, fellow Americans who just want to live peacefully without hate and discrimination.
Right wing activists were mercilessly demonized, dehumanized and scapegoated during the Biden administration, and they still are in many left wing circles and on left wing media. And that rhetoric has inspired real world violence against Republican politicians and conservative activists.
The problem is that trans activism is not fringe in the context of its relation to the Democratic Party. At least, that's a problem for the Democrats. It's a huge plus for the Republican Party.
Would you also say that transphobia is a tentpole for the modern Republican party? Sure, it is. A more dispassionate framing would say that trans issues are flashpoint in the culture wars.
How can national socialist (everything within the state, nothing outside of the state) and Timothy McVeigh (who bombed OKC because he hated government power) be part of the same political movement?
Timothy McVeigh didn’t hate government power. He just hated liberal government power. Many pro militia people aren’t actually anti-government. They are a lot of the times pro big government, which is why a lot of them support Donald Trump despite the fact that Donald Trump has expanded the size of the federal government and has used the government to crack down on descent and civil liberties.
Nationalism. Hilter and the Nazi party picked winners and maintained capitalism, removing public services and privatizing them throughout his rein. Any nationalist movement that's vehemently anti immigrant/anti minority/ trying to return a country to a previous time is reactionary conservative. you can still have socialist policy, but because of who you allow to access those things and why can make you right wing.
It makes more sense if one considers right<-->left as a horseshoe rather than a straight line. The extremes bend around till they approach each other but don't touch. Their economic programs differ, but they're both authoritarian, anti-democratic, and patriarchal, among other things.
And the fact that somehow they have been able to move fascism from its roots on the left to the right and white-supremacy from its roots on the left(Democray Party) is crazy and definitely skews the findings.
Thanks for your post Alex. As Thomas Sowell says, "compared to what?" You claim, rightly, that political violence is rare. Indeed. But what is the standard? Zero. Compared to the standard, the violence is too high and, therefore, not acceptable.
Good comment. As I wrote in an earlier post: "Only 81 happened since 2020, accounting for 0.07 percent of all murders during that time, or 7 out of 10,000."
I have an issue with the description of "Neo-Nazi and White Supremacy" as Right wing terrorism. There is zero support among political leaders for these ideologies. These should be stripped out into their own category of crazy.
No, there isn't any debate on this. Neo-Nazism and white supremacy is far right. And its a prominent form of violence and you want to ignore it and ignore blame.
"The Nazi Party was the radical far-right movement and political party led by Adolf Hitler. Its formal name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP). Nazi ideology was racist, nationalist, and anti-democratic. It was violently antisemitic and anti-Marxist.
The Nazi Party was founded in the aftermath of World War I. It won little popular support until the crisis of the Great Depression. In 1933, the German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor. At the time, non-Nazis dominated Germany’s government. However, the Nazis used emergency decrees, violence, and intimidation to quickly seize control. The Nazis abolished all other political parties. They declared Germany a one-party state with Hitler as its supreme leader."
What an absurd thing to say it’s not gaslighting you’re just wrong. They use the term national socialism specifically for the purpose to try to win over lower class people to expand their base when in power. The first people they targeted was socialist and communist.
socialism being in their name is irrelevant that’s like North Korea is democratic because their full name is the Democratic people’s republic of North Korea
I don’t think arguing over whether they were Left or Right is useful. They were Totalitarian, so when you get beyond the rhetoric and symbolism, they shared far more with Communists and Authoritarian Socialist than differences.
they aren't putting ownership of these people on the Republican and Democratic parties, merely their political spectrums. Democrats aren't even left wing, its a neoliberal capitalist party, given no better other alternative some further left wing groups vote for them purely due to the two party system. neo-nazi and white supremacist groups are a far right ideology that may not be reflected adamantly by the republican party but is a further right wing movement.
My overall point is that there are political ideas that do not fit neatly into a single scale and\or the location on said scale is open to debate. See for example "Political Compass" or https://philarchive.org/archive/JCLTPC as an alternative (not that I'm endorsing).
This use of the “political spectrum” would have the effect of putting a hypothetical libertarian terrorist who attacks the DMV because he disagrees, in principle, with drivers’ licenses being mandatory in the same box with a hypothetical White Supremacist who attacks the County Clerk because he objects to legal recognition of interracial marriage. Obviously, these two hypothetical terrorists are totally different.
More to the point, the Neonazi/White Supremacist crew disagrees in principle with the mainstream conservative movement. The far left, by contrast, wants what the Democrats want, just more of it.
Yes but both of those people would be on the right. Its weird right wing libertarians who cry about seat belts.
You people literally don't live in reality. The "far left" wants Universal Healthcare and tuition free college. Majority of Democrats in power don't even fight for those issues.
The modern day republican party is literally far right, the republican party is now pushing great replacement conspiracy theories. Charlie Kirk literally said the Civil Rights Acts should be removed and hates MLK and thinks Juneteenth should be removed. This is the modern day republican party. Many main stream republicans don't openly express Neo-Nazi white supremacist views but still side with them. Trump literally met with Nick Fuentes, Alex Jones has been around Nick Fuentes, many republicans in Trumps cabinet have gone to white nationalist organizations.
JFC you people are still doing the but the democrats KKK. The KKK are now entirely republican. The Democratic Party and the Republican Party switched platforms. It was called the Southern Strategy, its not a coincidence that the democratic party which controlled the South and the republican party that controlled the north is now in reverse with republicans controlling the south and democrats controlling the north. Its not a coincidence that its the republican party today fighting to keep up confederate statues and are flying around confederate flags. Trump just changed the name of a military base to go back to the name of a confederate general.
The KKK has always been labeled a far right terrorist group and today, the KKK is now entirely republican. Because the parties switched and the KKK was always far right
Charlie Kirk literally opposed the civil rights act, you know who also opposed the civil rights acts? The KKK and segregationists. So spare me with your revisionist propaganda that has been debunked time and time again
Most of my Republicans friends are not that and obviously denounce that category of crazy.*
Which should be easy. Same goes for the left in denouncing similar crazy.
Let's lower the temp, and if someone on either side can't denounce crazy & harmful - we should let them know they are not welcome in the sensible left or right.
They have their crazy bucket. The unhelpful completely un-American category.
* I'd file under "progressive, but fiscally conservative and anti-corruption", but can't vote here, so no D or R. I just don't want anyone to go homeless after a bad medical bill and ensuring politicians can't bought.
The problem with this is that it categorizes Nazi ideology as right wing, but that's a left wing ideology as mountainous quantities of historical evidence clearly show.
A quick reality check should also reveal this. Someone who hates Jews and views everything through the lens of race: which ideology best fits that description today? Not the right, which makes sense because the Nazis were very open about being left wing.
When correctly categorized the left completely dominates political violence.
"The Nazi Party was the radical far-right movement and political party led by Adolf Hitler. Its formal name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP). Nazi ideology was racist, nationalist, and anti-democratic. It was violently antisemitic and anti-Marxist.
The Nazi Party was founded in the aftermath of World War I. It won little popular support until the crisis of the Great Depression. In 1933, the German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor. At the time, non-Nazis dominated Germany’s government. However, the Nazis used emergency decrees, violence, and intimidation to quickly seize control. The Nazis abolished all other political parties. They declared Germany a one-party state with Hitler as its supreme leader."
People like you are why many on the left have no sympathy for Charlie Kirk, you people are propagandists, and openly push lies and your own fake reality. And we are tired of it.
You're quoting the modern left wing narrative. How about we quote Hitler instead?
> My party at the time was 90% left-wing people. I only needed people who would brawl. It was the same everywhere: people who didn't want to hit others, but only carried out projects that they then whispered to you in secret, were of no use. I needed people who stood by what had to be done. (Hitler, Nov 30th 1941)
One piece of evidence amongst hundreds showing that the Nazis were a far left movement. My article proves you wrong, comprehensively and completely.
But like always with the left, you haven't tried to Prove Me Wrong, as Charlie Kirk would have asked. You probably didn't read past the headline. You're just hoping that the mindless repetition of lies continues to work as it did in the past.
This is the same tactic we now see leftists adopting this week, as they try to claim Tyler Robinson was a right wing Groyper despite the physical evidence he left behind, his friends and his family all being 100% in agreement that he was a left wing fanatic. They hope that if they're aggressive and consistent enough on this lie, people will eventually stop arguing with them and they will get to rewrite reality. It is EXACTLY what they did with World War 2.
Stop lying, start accepting that if Hitler was born today he'd be organizing Antifa.
Hitler literally killed anarchists and anti fascists when he got into power and even before he officially got into power. You literally don’t live in reality. Again, f*ck off
First of all your quote is entirely made up. I looked everywhere and couldn’t find that quote actually existing. The origin of that quote came from a person who worked for the Mises Institute which is a right wing libertarian think tank where they advocate for policies such as being able to sell your children on the free market and illegal organ harvesting,
Not to mention this institute also has been affiliated with many on the far right who actually are affiliated with neo-nazi and white supremacist groups.
Your article was something you wrote and you cited a quote that originated from the far right Mises institute.
Nazism, fascism, the Nazi party, fascist parties, etc, are all far right. That is just an undeniable fact. And you’re a massive pos like all you people. Who refuse to accept reality and accept responsibility. So you call the fringe on your leftist when they are right wingers but then you expect the left to be honest about Tyler Robinson. You people are never honest about anything and refuse to ever take responsibility for anything. So you can just F*ck off
You "looked everywhere" but not the citation in the footnote of my article? The one that contains the original German, a page number and a link to a copy of the book of his speeches where he says that?
No it doesn't come from the Mises Institute, lol. They might have quoted it too but it was said by Hitler and written down by fellow Nazis in a book of his speeches. Go read it and see for yourself. The link is in my article.
Does anyone have names of politically motivated terrorist killers who should be added or subtracted from this list? Please give me a name and link to further information if you do. Thank you.
> Here's a short follow-up with my data and a detailed explanation of the methods and sources because linking to my earlier work on similar topics and writing, “I did the same thing,” left several readers confused.
We were "confused" because you said you linked to your data, but you didn't.
Categorizing Tyler as left wing really does a disservice to the credibility of everything else with all of the information we have so far about him. He does not appear to be left wing, or at the very least we just don’t know yet. He should not be included on this list
First of all, Robin Westman was a straight up neo-nazi and had the names of right wing terrorists written on her gun. As well as anti-immigrant and anti-semitic slurs.
Thomas Crooks was a registered republican and expressed anti-immigration and anti-semitic views.
This page also ignores the CDC shooter who was right wing who killed a security guard as well as the Florida State Shooting that happened this year the suspect was very right wing.
I think it is safe to say it will be nearly impossible to get any accurate data from our government for the next 3 1/4 years. Even regarding Crooks, it seems like any political attack will just assume the perpetrator was from the opposite side of the political spectrum unless there is an explicit, undisputable piece of evidence that is made public prior or immediately after the incident.
Hard to trust the "data" coming from official government posts on Twitter... sorry, X, especially when it seems that both sides are not treated even remotely similar.
Weird how Robin Westman's gun, ammo and manifesto was posted on Twitter (or wherever we do official reporting now) within like 12-24 hours of the incident.
It has been nearly a week since the Charlie Kirk incident, and they claim to have evidence that seem to be everchanging. Not a single photo has been release, which I can understand if the case is ongoing.. but like.. let's be real here.
Thomas Crooks was a registered Republican. We knew more about Robin Westman within hours than we know about Crooks over a year later.
Seems obvious to me what the common denominator is here, sadly it is only speculation since we still don't have the files. The shooter's files I mean.
He never said anarchists are right wing. But anti-government militia people are on the right and those are the people that have done political violence that is mentioned
I am curious about the inclusion or otherwise of many cases of school shootings where politics played some motivational role, but categorisation of terrorism is a bit unclear - how did you approach this?
This is so freaking biased and full of BS. You basically just said if it was was racial it was a right wing attack when you can look up all the info on the shootings and in none of them can you decent a clear political affiliation of the shooter but all of them aren’t even political violence it’s just violence. Your screwing data and righting your own conclusions to make people believe your shit.
With what we know of Robinson*, what metrics are being used to consider his ideology on the left of the political spectrum?
*Family pictures w/ guns, reported non voting Trump Supporter, following Nick Fuentes and Groyper meme's referenced on ammo all seem to point in the other direction.
I think there also needs to be a measure for "incoherent psychotic nut" that covers some of these guys, at least partially. E.g. "60% Right-wing, 40% psychotic nut."
Like, in what sense is this guy "right-wing"? (Matthew Riehl, 2017)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_Canyon_Apartment_Homes_shooting
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/31/us/colorado-deputies-shooting.html
He is categorized as such above, but if he were really on the Right, I'm sure that the NYT and Wiki would have made an effort to point that out.
One also should make an effort quantify the degree of public support for these things. Many, many people (doctors, teachers, etc.) are happy to offer public support to lefty killers like Luigi Mangione and Tyler Robinson, under their own names.
Whereas as someone who's been heavily online and following the Right on Twitter/X for many years, I've literally never -- NEVER -- seen cheers for a right-wing murderer online. One can't find pro-murder right-wing sentiment on public social media, one has to seek it out in the murky depths of group chats, Telegram, 4chan, etc.
I conclude that the public base of support for left-wing murder is significantly larger than that for right-wing murder.
Many on the right were cheerleaders for people like George Zimmerman, Daniel Penny, the people who killed Ahmaud Arbery. They also support Derek Chauvin and Daniel Perry.
They also love George Tiller's murderer and have supported Timothy McVeigh. So I don't know what you are getting at. The right wing literally has shown support for murderers. Including those found guilty and are locked up.
No one is cheerleading Tyler Robinson either, but many don't give a shit about Charlie Kirk's death either.
The right are also people that love to turn everything into a conspiracy theory to avoid blame. They don't defend the murder of the two democrats in Minnesota, they just make stuff up that the shooter is actually a lefty working for Tim Walz.
The right refuses to accept reality, they think Timothy McVeigh was set up
Support for something is irrelevant. The right wing are far more violent and commit far more political murders and political violence than the left.
https://www.adl.org/resources/report/murder-and-extremism-united-states-2024
https://www.csis.org/analysis/pushed-extremes-domestic-terrorism-amid-polarization-and-protest
This post requires many assumptions, one of the most easily defeated is that no one is cheerleading tyler robinson. A simple trip to reddit and or bluesky demonstrates this rapidly. Another assumption is that the ADL's leftist bias and flawed methodologies in their extremism study doesn't negate it's efficacy. There have been independent audits of the study that find the ADL to over report right wing extremism.
Over-report right wing? Because the data consistently shows right-wing violence to be far more prevalent that the United States and other countries had to created agencies to track and address the problem. They don’t only track right wing violence, they track all violence and categorize it based on motives. This guy doing this analysis is a solid right winger and went out of his way to give right wing the benefit of the doubt.
So now that the US under Trump is creating agencies to track left wing violence, that's an indication that leftist violence is the bigger problem, right?
I never said that there weren’t people cheerleading Tyler Robinson, but conservatives have cheerleader, many murderers, including those convicted of murder because they think that the jury or judges were liberal or some other nonsense.
The Anti-Defamation League is not leftist and it has supported many Republican politicians and many Republican policies like anti-BDS laws and also numerous other organizations including those that track terrorism and political extremism have confirmed that for right extremism is far more prevalent and four more deadly. These are just the facts.
There’s been no reporting that shows the ADL over samples right wing. Those claims come from conservative sources that want to claim neo-Nazis are somehow left wing whenever every historian scholar and expert knows and says that neo-Nazis are right wing
It does not really matter but you did say “No one is chearleading Tyler Robinson” some people are included in No one. Some people on the right chearlead “Their side”, and some people on the left chearlead “Their side”.
You seem to be calling people who engaged in self defense against criminals as political assassins.
Daniel Penny wasn’t engaging in self defense. He was never Attacked. The person he killed was having a mental breakdown, but did not physically attack anyone, but because he was yelling that gave Daniel Penny the justification to kill him. But I don’t think it was justification and it certainly wasn’t self defense.
Derek Chauvin was literally convicted of murder. There was no self-defense. It was straight up murder and since he was a police officer, it was state sanctioned murder.
Daniel Perry who was pardoned by the Texas governor literally called for violence and stated online that he wanted to do violence to Black Lives Matter protesters, and then he attempted to run them over with his car and when he crashed, the protesters approached the car and he shot and killed one of the protesters that wasn’t self-defense
Conservatives defended the murder of the black guy in Georgia because they claimed he was breaking in the houses when he wasn’t the killers were convicted of murder.
The only person that you can claim self-defense was George Zimmerman but the reason I mentioned him was because he ignored police orders to not follow him which he ignored and followed Trayvon Martin.
Conservatives side with the police nearly every time they kill a black person even when the black person wasn’t even resisting arrest or was even being arrested. Examples include Tamir Rice, John Crawford, and Philando Castile.
I’m a very honest person, which is why I didn’t include Kyle Rittenhouse, who I believe did use self defense but the other examples I gave we’re not self defense
Penny and Zimmerman were, obviously, acquitted in criminal court.
Chaining and Penny were about justice and the railroading of people by an unfair system
Bullshit. Penny killed a homeless person who was having mental health issues but the homeless person never attacked anyone and never harmed anyone. I live in LA, I've seen many homeless people, I've been on public transportation where there's been homeless people having mental health issues, I keep my distance but I never felt like I needed to go and murder someone because they are yelling or having a mental health issue.
Same goes for Chaining. Same thing.
You people are deranged and you all think you are in some video game or some shit. Unfair system my ass. Penny and Chaining aren't victims, you people aren't victims.
You raise an interesting point. We might classify “public support” but also “public indignation.” The main evidence for Tyler Robinson being a “lefty” is that CK was a “righty.” Cue the internet mobs, right-wing in this case. So the motivation of the killer is not really important. What is important is how any faction uses the event as a pretext to demonize “them.” It doesn’t need to be murder, of course. The Sidney Sweeney thing was an hilarious example of this. If the event fits your narrative, great. If it doesn’t you can always imagine a conspiracy to make it fit.
The slogans carved onto his unfired ammunition are pretty suggestive that Robinson leaned left.
And yet all the slogans turned out to be from some gaming site, that is definitely far from leaning left.
One of the slogans is a reference to Helldivers 2. The other two are associated with Antifa, and the fourth is a gay/furry/trans meme.
Conservatives are such hypocrites. When it comes to gun laws, your pro-gun ideology claims it’s not the gun’s fault, it’s the person. Now that there’s a person who shoots a conservative, you claim it’s not the person’s fault, it’s the fault of the left ideology. Make up your frickin mind!
Does Trump "lean left?" He called Harris a fascist several times a week during the campaign. We know CK had a coherent (if repugnant to many) world view. TR seems to be a jumble of shallow "feelz."
He only called Harris a fascist in the context of her calling him that:
> Referring to Democrats, Trump added: “They use that word — really, it’s both words. ‘He’s Hitler.’ And then they say, ‘He’s a Nazi.’” “I’m not a Nazi,” Trump said. “I’m the opposite of a Nazi.” Trump also responded to Harris calling him a fascist by saying, “She’s a fascist, OK? She’s a fascist.”
This isn't what is meant, obviously.
Trans boyfriend, "antifascist" slogans carved into his unused ammunition, trans/furry memes carved onto other ammunition, etc.
Being antifascist is not the same as being on the left. It is more than possible to be conservative and antifascist.
But "Antifa" specifically has always been a far left movement right back to the 1930s, by their own admission.
Except today in the United States it is the right that is actively using fascist language and actions, starting from the President down. When we have lawmakers and White House advisors praising and using Nazi rhetoric - that is the last word on this argument of who is anti-fascist.
"Antifacism" as a term has been co-opted by the left in recent years. Plus there are the accounts from friends and family about the suspect's political leanings.
Being antifascist is not the same as being on the left. It is more than possible to be conservative and antifascist.
Is it possible that he carved those as a deflection from his own leanings, especially if this whole "Groyper" thing is shown to be true? Or is that something that can easily be explained away as "something the radical left would do?"
Relatives and friends describe the shooter as leaning left politically. Relatives and friends also describe the trans boyfriend as leaning left politically.
If you're "heavily" following the right online and Twitter (which is now heavily right-wing) how would you see cheers for a ring-winger being murdered? And what do you mean by "pro-murder right-wing sentiment"? You mean like the president pardoning all of the insurrectionists? And how the GOP and right-wingers continually try to describe that as "peaceful protest" and that they didn't do anything wrong? I'd call that cheers for right-wing murder online, in the news, on the radio, tv and everywhere else. Lying about or dismissing a terrorism attack or murder is the same as approving of it.
Wrong! It’s so sad to be you if you’re still duped by tge corrupt, facist right-wing ideology.
Say what? Can you write in complete sentences?
Anti-government really needs to be sectioned off from "right-wing". It's otherwise really bizarre that you have aggressively statist (national socialist) ideologies in the same bracket as aggressively anti-statist ones.
Its simple, national socialists are far right and so are sovereign citizen people
The guy that shot up the Tree of Life synagogue hated Trump because he has a Jewish daughter, son-in-law, and granddaughter. The connection of these individuals to the mainstream Republican Party is tenuous.
OTOH, trans activism is a tentpole for the modern Democratic Party.
The guy who shot up the tree of life was a far right extremist. It does not matter that he hated Trump. Nick Fuentes also hates Trump so what’s your point?
The tree of life shooter expressed antisemitic, but also anti-immigrant anti-black and other far right views
Trans Activism isn’t fringe. Trans activism are people, human beings, fellow Americans who just want to live peacefully without hate and discrimination.
What you are saying is that civil rights activism is fringe. You’re part of the problem. 35+ trans people are murdered in the US every year for being trans and that’s an undercount. Government has stripped away much of their civil liberties, freedoms, and bodily automany while painting them as some violent fringe group.
FYI Hitler burned down and murdered the only trans clinic in Germany at that time and killed those who worked there
Any activism on the right is also frequently deemed fringe / extremist / domestic terrorist.
Right wing activists are people, human beings, fellow Americans who just want to live peacefully without hate and discrimination.
Right wing activists were mercilessly demonized, dehumanized and scapegoated during the Biden administration, and they still are in many left wing circles and on left wing media. And that rhetoric has inspired real world violence against Republican politicians and conservative activists.
The problem is that trans activism is not fringe in the context of its relation to the Democratic Party. At least, that's a problem for the Democrats. It's a huge plus for the Republican Party.
Would you also say that transphobia is a tentpole for the modern Republican party? Sure, it is. A more dispassionate framing would say that trans issues are flashpoint in the culture wars.
How can national socialist (everything within the state, nothing outside of the state) and Timothy McVeigh (who bombed OKC because he hated government power) be part of the same political movement?
Timothy McVeigh didn’t hate government power. He just hated liberal government power. Many pro militia people aren’t actually anti-government. They are a lot of the times pro big government, which is why a lot of them support Donald Trump despite the fact that Donald Trump has expanded the size of the federal government and has used the government to crack down on descent and civil liberties.
Nationalism. Hilter and the Nazi party picked winners and maintained capitalism, removing public services and privatizing them throughout his rein. Any nationalist movement that's vehemently anti immigrant/anti minority/ trying to return a country to a previous time is reactionary conservative. you can still have socialist policy, but because of who you allow to access those things and why can make you right wing.
The Nazi party vastly expanded public services, but I'll leave that aside.
McVeigh was something like an anarchist. The Nazi's definitely were anarchists. There is just no daylight between these two.
If you definition of Nazi is just "any white that shows any racial consciousness" that is such a wide tent as to be meaningless.
It makes more sense if one considers right<-->left as a horseshoe rather than a straight line. The extremes bend around till they approach each other but don't touch. Their economic programs differ, but they're both authoritarian, anti-democratic, and patriarchal, among other things.
And the fact that somehow they have been able to move fascism from its roots on the left to the right and white-supremacy from its roots on the left(Democray Party) is crazy and definitely skews the findings.
Thanks for your post Alex. As Thomas Sowell says, "compared to what?" You claim, rightly, that political violence is rare. Indeed. But what is the standard? Zero. Compared to the standard, the violence is too high and, therefore, not acceptable.
Good comment. As I wrote in an earlier post: "Only 81 happened since 2020, accounting for 0.07 percent of all murders during that time, or 7 out of 10,000."
https://www.alexnowrasteh.com/p/politically-motivated-violence-is
I have an issue with the description of "Neo-Nazi and White Supremacy" as Right wing terrorism. There is zero support among political leaders for these ideologies. These should be stripped out into their own category of crazy.
No, there isn't any debate on this. Neo-Nazism and white supremacy is far right. And its a prominent form of violence and you want to ignore it and ignore blame.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-nazi-party-1
"The Nazi Party was the radical far-right movement and political party led by Adolf Hitler. Its formal name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP). Nazi ideology was racist, nationalist, and anti-democratic. It was violently antisemitic and anti-Marxist.
The Nazi Party was founded in the aftermath of World War I. It won little popular support until the crisis of the Great Depression. In 1933, the German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor. At the time, non-Nazis dominated Germany’s government. However, the Nazis used emergency decrees, violence, and intimidation to quickly seize control. The Nazis abolished all other political parties. They declared Germany a one-party state with Hitler as its supreme leader."
What an absurd thing to say it’s not gaslighting you’re just wrong. They use the term national socialism specifically for the purpose to try to win over lower class people to expand their base when in power. The first people they targeted was socialist and communist.
socialism being in their name is irrelevant that’s like North Korea is democratic because their full name is the Democratic people’s republic of North Korea
No, the evidence that National Socialists were Socialist goes far beyond their name. Look at the social and economic policies that they implemented.
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/was-hitler-a-precursor-of-anti-semitic
I don’t think arguing over whether they were Left or Right is useful. They were Totalitarian, so when you get beyond the rhetoric and symbolism, they shared far more with Communists and Authoritarian Socialist than differences.
they aren't putting ownership of these people on the Republican and Democratic parties, merely their political spectrums. Democrats aren't even left wing, its a neoliberal capitalist party, given no better other alternative some further left wing groups vote for them purely due to the two party system. neo-nazi and white supremacist groups are a far right ideology that may not be reflected adamantly by the republican party but is a further right wing movement.
My overall point is that there are political ideas that do not fit neatly into a single scale and\or the location on said scale is open to debate. See for example "Political Compass" or https://philarchive.org/archive/JCLTPC as an alternative (not that I'm endorsing).
This use of the “political spectrum” would have the effect of putting a hypothetical libertarian terrorist who attacks the DMV because he disagrees, in principle, with drivers’ licenses being mandatory in the same box with a hypothetical White Supremacist who attacks the County Clerk because he objects to legal recognition of interracial marriage. Obviously, these two hypothetical terrorists are totally different.
More to the point, the Neonazi/White Supremacist crew disagrees in principle with the mainstream conservative movement. The far left, by contrast, wants what the Democrats want, just more of it.
Yes but both of those people would be on the right. Its weird right wing libertarians who cry about seat belts.
You people literally don't live in reality. The "far left" wants Universal Healthcare and tuition free college. Majority of Democrats in power don't even fight for those issues.
The modern day republican party is literally far right, the republican party is now pushing great replacement conspiracy theories. Charlie Kirk literally said the Civil Rights Acts should be removed and hates MLK and thinks Juneteenth should be removed. This is the modern day republican party. Many main stream republicans don't openly express Neo-Nazi white supremacist views but still side with them. Trump literally met with Nick Fuentes, Alex Jones has been around Nick Fuentes, many republicans in Trumps cabinet have gone to white nationalist organizations.
Please communicate a single policy that the DNC actively advocates for that socialist or anti-capitalist movements advocate for them to support.
I will wait.
Social Security & Medicare
Green New Deal
Obamacare
Student Loans
Government Subsidized Loans to favored businesses
Both parties constantly endorse socialist and anti-capitalist policies.
President Biden came out in favor of a wealth tax on unrealized Capital Gains.
Open borders — actual policy for four years.
And the Democratic Party has embraced the far left position on transgenderism.
Thanks Pete, you understand and clarify my point.
JFC you people are still doing the but the democrats KKK. The KKK are now entirely republican. The Democratic Party and the Republican Party switched platforms. It was called the Southern Strategy, its not a coincidence that the democratic party which controlled the South and the republican party that controlled the north is now in reverse with republicans controlling the south and democrats controlling the north. Its not a coincidence that its the republican party today fighting to keep up confederate statues and are flying around confederate flags. Trump just changed the name of a military base to go back to the name of a confederate general.
The KKK has always been labeled a far right terrorist group and today, the KKK is now entirely republican. Because the parties switched and the KKK was always far right
https://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html
Charlie Kirk literally opposed the civil rights act, you know who also opposed the civil rights acts? The KKK and segregationists. So spare me with your revisionist propaganda that has been debunked time and time again
I actually love that.
Most of my Republicans friends are not that and obviously denounce that category of crazy.*
Which should be easy. Same goes for the left in denouncing similar crazy.
Let's lower the temp, and if someone on either side can't denounce crazy & harmful - we should let them know they are not welcome in the sensible left or right.
They have their crazy bucket. The unhelpful completely un-American category.
* I'd file under "progressive, but fiscally conservative and anti-corruption", but can't vote here, so no D or R. I just don't want anyone to go homeless after a bad medical bill and ensuring politicians can't bought.
The problem with this is that it categorizes Nazi ideology as right wing, but that's a left wing ideology as mountainous quantities of historical evidence clearly show.
https://penbroke.substack.com/p/the-nazis-were-a-far-left-party
A quick reality check should also reveal this. Someone who hates Jews and views everything through the lens of race: which ideology best fits that description today? Not the right, which makes sense because the Nazis were very open about being left wing.
When correctly categorized the left completely dominates political violence.
You're 100% wrong and linking your crappy substack still makes you wrong. The Nazi's were a far right fascist group. That is just an undeniable fact.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-nazi-party-1
"The Nazi Party was the radical far-right movement and political party led by Adolf Hitler. Its formal name was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP). Nazi ideology was racist, nationalist, and anti-democratic. It was violently antisemitic and anti-Marxist.
The Nazi Party was founded in the aftermath of World War I. It won little popular support until the crisis of the Great Depression. In 1933, the German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor. At the time, non-Nazis dominated Germany’s government. However, the Nazis used emergency decrees, violence, and intimidation to quickly seize control. The Nazis abolished all other political parties. They declared Germany a one-party state with Hitler as its supreme leader."
People like you are why many on the left have no sympathy for Charlie Kirk, you people are propagandists, and openly push lies and your own fake reality. And we are tired of it.
You're quoting the modern left wing narrative. How about we quote Hitler instead?
> My party at the time was 90% left-wing people. I only needed people who would brawl. It was the same everywhere: people who didn't want to hit others, but only carried out projects that they then whispered to you in secret, were of no use. I needed people who stood by what had to be done. (Hitler, Nov 30th 1941)
One piece of evidence amongst hundreds showing that the Nazis were a far left movement. My article proves you wrong, comprehensively and completely.
But like always with the left, you haven't tried to Prove Me Wrong, as Charlie Kirk would have asked. You probably didn't read past the headline. You're just hoping that the mindless repetition of lies continues to work as it did in the past.
This is the same tactic we now see leftists adopting this week, as they try to claim Tyler Robinson was a right wing Groyper despite the physical evidence he left behind, his friends and his family all being 100% in agreement that he was a left wing fanatic. They hope that if they're aggressive and consistent enough on this lie, people will eventually stop arguing with them and they will get to rewrite reality. It is EXACTLY what they did with World War 2.
Stop lying, start accepting that if Hitler was born today he'd be organizing Antifa.
Hitler literally killed anarchists and anti fascists when he got into power and even before he officially got into power. You literally don’t live in reality. Again, f*ck off
Left wing dictators always kill their rivals when they get into power. Do you think Trotsky was not a communist because he was killed by the left?
First of all your quote is entirely made up. I looked everywhere and couldn’t find that quote actually existing. The origin of that quote came from a person who worked for the Mises Institute which is a right wing libertarian think tank where they advocate for policies such as being able to sell your children on the free market and illegal organ harvesting,
Not to mention this institute also has been affiliated with many on the far right who actually are affiliated with neo-nazi and white supremacist groups.
Your article was something you wrote and you cited a quote that originated from the far right Mises institute.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
Nazism (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/English https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LL-Q1860_(eng)-Vealhurl-Nazism.wavhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Pronunciation_respelling_key), formally named National Socialism(NS; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language: Nationalsozialismus, German:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/Standard_German https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:De-at-Nationalsozialismus.ogg), is the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politicshttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology and practices associated with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler and the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party (NSDAP) in Germany.[1][2][3] During https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler%27s_rise_to_power, it was frequently called Hitler Fascism and Hitlerism. The term "https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism" is applied to other far-right groups with similar ideology, which formed after World War II.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
The Nazi Party,[b] officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei [c] or NSDAP), was a https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics[10][11][12] political party in Germany active between 1920 and 1945 that created and supported the ideology of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism. Its precursor, the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Workers%27_Party (Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; DAP), existed from 1919 to 1920. The Nazi Party emerged from the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nationalism("https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%B6lkisch_nationalismhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%B6lkisch_nationalism"), https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism, and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populismhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freikorps paramilitary culture, which fought against https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism uprisings in post–https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_IGermany.[13]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Fascism (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/English https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Pronunciation_respelling_key) is a https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian, and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultranationalist political ideology and movement that rose to prominence in early-20th-century Europe.[1][2][3] Fascism is characterized by a https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorleader, centralized https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocracy, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarism, forcible suppression of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_(politics), belief in a natural https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_hierarchy, subordination of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual interests for the perceived interest of the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation or https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization), and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[3][4] Opposed to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralism_(political_philosophy), and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism,[5][6] fascism is at the far right of the traditional https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_spectrum.[1][6][7]
Nazism, fascism, the Nazi party, fascist parties, etc, are all far right. That is just an undeniable fact. And you’re a massive pos like all you people. Who refuse to accept reality and accept responsibility. So you call the fringe on your leftist when they are right wingers but then you expect the left to be honest about Tyler Robinson. You people are never honest about anything and refuse to ever take responsibility for anything. So you can just F*ck off
You "looked everywhere" but not the citation in the footnote of my article? The one that contains the original German, a page number and a link to a copy of the book of his speeches where he says that?
No it doesn't come from the Mises Institute, lol. They might have quoted it too but it was said by Hitler and written down by fellow Nazis in a book of his speeches. Go read it and see for yourself. The link is in my article.
Does anyone have names of politically motivated terrorist killers who should be added or subtracted from this list? Please give me a name and link to further information if you do. Thank you.
> Here's a short follow-up with my data and a detailed explanation of the methods and sources because linking to my earlier work on similar topics and writing, “I did the same thing,” left several readers confused.
We were "confused" because you said you linked to your data, but you didn't.
Categorizing Tyler as left wing really does a disservice to the credibility of everything else with all of the information we have so far about him. He does not appear to be left wing, or at the very least we just don’t know yet. He should not be included on this list
This post is very inaccurate.
First of all, Robin Westman was a straight up neo-nazi and had the names of right wing terrorists written on her gun. As well as anti-immigrant and anti-semitic slurs.
Thomas Crooks was a registered republican and expressed anti-immigration and anti-semitic views.
This page also ignores the CDC shooter who was right wing who killed a security guard as well as the Florida State Shooting that happened this year the suspect was very right wing.
I think it is safe to say it will be nearly impossible to get any accurate data from our government for the next 3 1/4 years. Even regarding Crooks, it seems like any political attack will just assume the perpetrator was from the opposite side of the political spectrum unless there is an explicit, undisputable piece of evidence that is made public prior or immediately after the incident.
Hard to trust the "data" coming from official government posts on Twitter... sorry, X, especially when it seems that both sides are not treated even remotely similar.
Weird how Robin Westman's gun, ammo and manifesto was posted on Twitter (or wherever we do official reporting now) within like 12-24 hours of the incident.
It has been nearly a week since the Charlie Kirk incident, and they claim to have evidence that seem to be everchanging. Not a single photo has been release, which I can understand if the case is ongoing.. but like.. let's be real here.
Thomas Crooks was a registered Republican. We knew more about Robin Westman within hours than we know about Crooks over a year later.
Seems obvious to me what the common denominator is here, sadly it is only speculation since we still don't have the files. The shooter's files I mean.
Anarchists and anti-government are all right wing? lol. Lmao even. How do you still have a job?
He never said anarchists are right wing. But anti-government militia people are on the right and those are the people that have done political violence that is mentioned
He did, actually.
I am curious about the inclusion or otherwise of many cases of school shootings where politics played some motivational role, but categorisation of terrorism is a bit unclear - how did you approach this?
This is so freaking biased and full of BS. You basically just said if it was was racial it was a right wing attack when you can look up all the info on the shootings and in none of them can you decent a clear political affiliation of the shooter but all of them aren’t even political violence it’s just violence. Your screwing data and righting your own conclusions to make people believe your shit.
Where are all the deaths related to the BLM riots?
Question about the last entry in the table:
"Robinson, Tyler 9 10 2025 1.00 NA USA Left"
With what we know of Robinson*, what metrics are being used to consider his ideology on the left of the political spectrum?
*Family pictures w/ guns, reported non voting Trump Supporter, following Nick Fuentes and Groyper meme's referenced on ammo all seem to point in the other direction.
He's living with and fucking a tranny, he's got anti-fascist stuff engraved on his bullets, and he shot a conservative celebrity.
Westman, Robin M. was for sure right wing. the anti-semitic far right online accelerationist groups they are a part of are expressly far right.
“My research uses an expensive definition…”
How much does it cost?
Cope and seethe. Facts don't care about your feelings
https://www.csis.org/analysis/pushed-extremes-domestic-terrorism-amid-polarization-and-protest