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.
I actually played Helldivers 2 for a while before I got bored with it, and the controller sequence to call down the 500 kg bomb is one of the easiest in the game to remember, compared to others that are 10-12 inputs. That's probably why I focused on it.
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.
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian political ideology characterized by dictatorial power, extreme nationalism, forcible suppression of opposition, rigid social hierarchy, and strong control over society and the economy, often with militaristic and racist elements. It subordinates individual interests to those of the nation or a perceived racial group.
"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.
Then you are deep in a misinformation hole. Nothing of that is true.
Go read updates from the official investigations. Watch the press events if you need to. In fact so far nothing the Daily Mail has reported is false, it's all sourced directly back to the US government and they haven't yet made mistakes, but if you want to ignore it then go ahead and find the other sources. They're all getting their information from the same place after all.
And then you should accept that you don't know how to judge the reliability of information on the internet, because your response to being shown that your beliefs are false was to stick your fingers in your ears and say "la la can't hear you".
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.
1. Twitter is “more heavily” right than what? You don’t even tell us in your unintelligible diatribe. It is definitely more heavily right than it was before Musk took it over, but to your twisted thinking it seems “more heavily” right because before it was almost exclusively dominated by libtards.
2. What we mean by “pro-murder right wing sentiment” is that when we see the unhinged celebration of Charlie Kirk’s death from bloodthirsty Leftists, we are awakened to the fact that many of your comrades would also celebrate the death of people who hold similar views as Charlie if they dare profess them. Half the country believes many of the things that Charlie stood for and morally bankrupt Leftists want us dead!
3. All you clowns have is January 6 and what has been revealed subsequent to that time is that were actually FBI agents in crowd inciting the protesters and Nancy Pelosi restrained the National Guard. January 6 was allowed to happen and has been your only talking point since.
Becky, Conservative’s were under the delusion that the Left’s assertion that speech is violence and thus it is legitimate to physically attack and even kill someone for saying things that hurt people’s feelings could not be true. It’s been made abundantly clear by the gleeful public reactions of teachers, healthcare professionals and even those who profess to be religious that it is true and we in the right are in danger. Hopefully, if you haven’t been to brainwashed you can one day acknowledge that many on your side of the aisle are part of a death cult and you can turn away from that evil. Unfortunately, by your accusations of fascism you are definitely deeply deluded already. You can’t even recognize the fact that it is your side using the tactics of fascists. Do you see the members of Antifa in the streets? They actually dress like Mussolini’s Blackshirts! I will pray for you but will have to block you because at this point any further discussion is fruitless.
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
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.
It’s about what’s right not about what’s popular. Gay marriage didn’t get majority support from the public until 2012. Support for interracial marriage in this country didn’t get over 50% support until the mid 1990s.
As always culture will shift left and you people who want to violate and harm people’s rights and civil liberties will look out of touch again but of course you all will find way to push revisionist history on everything like you people always do
It sure looks to me like culture is shifting right currently.
Plus you are being selective on your issues. The left in this country used to oppose the death penalty and advocate for gun control. Over the last few decades it has become easier and easier to purchase and carry a firearm in the majority of the country. At the same time liberal opposition to the death penalty has evaporated.
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.
but the nazi's weren't that. They were wildly anti-immigrant, wildly reactionary, anti-semetic and maintained capitalism. Public services expanded for the purposes of expanding that "Pure" ideology of what a german was supposed to be. it wasn't for everyone. If you think even for a minute Nazi's were a left wing ideology or even close to one, i have a bridge to sell you.
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."
Quit gaslighting us. What is Nazi an abbreviation for; Nationalsozialist, or "National Socialist". What Nazi are is in their name. Because of Leftist brainwashing you don’t even know what Nazi’s were.
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.
Lmfao. Citing your own substack. You’re a dipshit dude. No one’s reading that garbage.
Who should I believe actual historians and scholars or some random dipshit with a substack account? Yea I’ll take the holocaust encyclopedia. They know more than you
“The National Socialist German Workers’ Party—also known as the Nazi Party—was the far-right racist and antisemitic political party led by Adolf Hitler. The Nazi Party came to power in Germany in 1933. It controlled all aspects of German life and persecuted German Jews. Its power only ended when Germany lost World War II.”
And people like you still compare right-left spectrum through US politics while ignoring right wing politics being different in many ways than what is considered right wing in the USA. Right wing view points in Europe and elsewhere has always defending statism and has been critical of free markets.
Get out of your bubble and stop posting your shitty substack. No one’s going to read that
Can you name one non-Communist regime that implemented more socialistic economic and social policies than the German National Socialist regime in the 1930s/40s?
Such an insightful response from someone who is obviously an esteemed historian.
If you prefer books, then you can read my book series instead. Or view its bibliography, which has hundreds of sources. Or do you want to verify my PhD from Brown University in Political Science?
And stop pretending that you actually read the article. I never said anything about Left/Right. As I mentioned in the article (which you did not actually read), the terms are not very useful in describing totalitarian regimes. Communists, Fascists and National Socialists share far more in common with each other than differences.
The question is whether National Socialists are actually Socialist.
At the bottom, I cite multiple books by historians of the period. But then again, you did not get that far, did you?
Ah yes the holocaust encyclopedia. There would be know reason for Jews who themselves are supporters of Leftist ideology to contend that National Socialism is right wing, You are truly pathetic.
No sir, your assessments are totally absurd. Look at the policies that the Nazi enforced and endorsed. A take over of all businesses in the country. Free heath care for the masses. Of course they targeted other political parties, that’s what totalitarians do. They installed Socialists policies because that’s what socialist do. If it walks like a duck and talks like it is duck. In the case of Nazi they actually told you who they are; National Socialists. Start thinking for yourself rather than referring to leftist historians who have an agenda to taint Conservatives who believe in limited government and free markets as Nazis. It’s laughable.
Why are you still here? You are just flat out wrong about this. The Nazi party and Nazism same with fascism are far right. You are living in your own bubble thinking the rest of the worlds conservatism or right wing politics is the same as the United States. Far right politicians in Europe even to this day, are not free market capitalists. Marine Le Pen of France, that the far right loves including Trump and his base. Had more socialistic economic policies than the actual French socialist party candidate.
The far right and right wing parties in Europe and elsewhere across the world are not free market capitalists but that does not mean that it means they are left wing. Right wing politics in other parts of the world is pro statist and pro government taking control of things.
Like every low IQ American, you think only in your bubble. Universal Healthcare literally exists in capitalist Singapore and capitalist Hong Kong along with every other capitalist country on earth besides the USA.
You’re a moron who thinks historians are leftists but then want to push your own revisionist propaganda that comes not
From historians or scholars but right wing pundits who are trying to push lies and propaganda to the masses. You’re just wrong. Take the L and f*ck off
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.
Amusing that racists like Dylann Roof are classified as Right wing. This stems from the fact that the Left and their allies in the MSM have falsely branded Conservatives and the Political Right as racists, conveniently ignoring the fact that the founders of KKK were Democrats! There are no Conservatives who support White Supremacist or white Nationalism.
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
You clearly have no idea of Kirk’s opinion about the civil rights. You are just pushing the Lefts lies about Kirk’s statements that were totally taken out of context.
Actually, I do and he has stated it multiple times on his podcast and an interview that he thought the civil rights act was a bad mistake and he has also hated on Martin Luther King multiple times. These are just the facts.
As always you take his comments out of context to advance your narrative. Kirk reached out to AAs in a way that sadly few Conservatives do. There are many AAs paying tribute to him countering the hatred coming from people like you.
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.
You are wrong on all points. Medicare and Social Security are obviously Socialized programs. What aspect of either of them involve freedom of the individual to participate? Everything you say demonstrates a total lack of understanding what Socialism is.
So what you’re trying to tell me is that a move to install federal control over both healthcare and higher education is not a move toward socialism? Quit gaslighting us clown.
Obamacare is a hand out to corporations, it is a public/private partnership inline with neoliberal values. It does not provide a public competitor to corporations so they can continue to price gouge.
Student loans aren't socialism, what?
Social Security and Medicare were created eons ago and supported by both parties overwhelmingly. Its been slowly gutted by both democrats and republicans.
Government subsidized loans to businesses is consistent with neoliberalism. Neoliberalism utilizes government power to prop up and accelerate capitalism. Its the whole, socialism for business, capitalism for people. The banks can't fail but the people can rot.
You clearly don’t have the facts or wish to gaslight us. Of course Obamacare was a move toward socialized medicine. It forced everyone to buy health insurance whether they wanted it or not. Obama also eliminated Private Lending for student loans essentially making taxpayers liable for all student loans. Essentially this is socialism, since many of the loans will be forgiven. While you are right that Republicans voted for SS, Medicare and Medicaid it is Democrats who have blocked any reforms to these programs that would make them sustainable. No Democrat has admitted they want open borders, they clearly do or they would have kept policies Trump had in his 1st term. Evidence of your false claim is the fact that the border was essentially closed during the 1st 3 months of Trumps second term!
Biden never pushed for a wealth tax. He might have briefly said something in favor of it but never actually pushed that policy into actual legislation.
Open borders also isn't "socialism".
Supporting trans rights isn't far left. But thinking those people are vermin and wanting to remove all of their rights is 100% far right.
Supporting civil rights for people should never be considered far left and if it is considered that to some people. Then that is an issue with the modern day republican party clearly being pro authoritarian and against civil rights.
Listen dipshit I am further right than most people you will meet and I don’t endorse anything that you are claiming we support and there are very few if any that do.
1. Trans people are not vermin. They are people with a mental illness called gender dysphoria. They should receive psychiatric care and be allowed to transition as a last resort after at least receiving 2 years of therapy.
2. If you knew anything about Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, you would know that the majority of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for them. There is no modern day Republican that is against civil rights.
Because of your bigotry you attempt to tarnish all Republican with the broad brush of racism and transphobia. Get a brain.
Oh look, you failed immediately. NO DEMOCRATS at all, not a single one has advocated for open borders. Every democrat president and legislature has increased deportations and seizures in the last 20 years and funding over prior admins. Biden oversaw one of the largest increases to ICE funding since Trump. Failed 1/3
Biden and Kamala both floated the idea of capital gains taxes and both refused to ever even attempt to implement them. Capital gains tax proposal exist entirely as a way to counter ultra wealthy people avoiding taxation by getting paid in stocks and options and of course, the refused to even try to implement them because they know who feeds them. those same ultra wealthy donors. Failed 2/3
Transgender people exist. The DNC is adamantly against outwardly supporting them. Kamala Harris was so barred from even trying she refused to commit to outward support and only said "She would follow the law". This isn't even a leftist or socialist policy. this is just basic human decency to acknowledge trans people exist. Something we've acknowledged for hundreds of years.
1/Fail. Of course no Democrats have advocated for open borders.
It would be politically indefensible. But you judge politicians by what they do not their campaign speeches . Over 10 million illegal aliens crossed the border during the Biden’s term. He did nothing to stop it because that’s what his party wants.
2/Fail. You seem to confuse Capital Gains taxes with Wealth tax. The idea of a Wealth Tax was proposed but never taken seriously because it is impossible to administer.
3/ Fail. No one denies the existence of people who believe they are transgender. Clearly, the Democrat party supports transgender ideology; they flew the LGBTQ flag over the WH and allowed transgenders in the military and supported tax payers paying for their transition in prison as well the military.
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.
You see Racist symbols everywhere don’t you asshole? You have about as much brain power as AOC and Jasmine Crockett, 2 of the more intelligent members of the Democrat Party. Enjoy your life you pathetic loser. I’m done here. There’s no hope for you!
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.
First of all, what you cited was Hitler's Table Talks which has been completely discredited as not a reliable source of information. This is literally just common knowledge. There were huge issues especially with the English and French versions and the original German notes were not a verbatim transcript but a filtered and edited account of Hitler's monologues.
The German text, which the French and English editions are said to be based upon, was, for reasons that are unclear, not published until 1980. So Werner Jochmann was not even taking the original german notes which have now been lost but was translating the English and French version which came out first and published that version in German. Well its now proven the English and French version was filled with inaccuracies, mistranslations, and outright made up statements. And the version Werner Jochmann wrote in German came directly from the fraudulent French and English version.
"The English translation I already demonstrated to be fraudulent, based on the heavily and bizarrely distorted French translation of Genoud. But even the German text (of which there are multiple disagreeing versions) intermingles the views of each entry’s authors and editors with Hitler’s, takes Hitler’s comments out of context and even creates new context for them, mistakes the comments of others present as Hitler’s, and is drawn at best from loose memory a day after the fact, by three or four different persons at different times, after countless things were discussed by numerous people. And then all was edited and added to by Bormann. (And possibly meddled with by Genoud!)"
--
On top of that, even if that quote was real. You are also taking it out of context. That monologue is 368 pages long and you took one paragraph out of that. It is already common knowledge that Hitler tried to also appeal to those on the left to cast a wider tent and to have larger support.
Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party deliberately used rhetoric and platform points meant to appeal to and co-opt working-class and other leftist voters. However, this "socialist" messaging was a superficial tactic to expand the Nazis' voter base and did not represent the party's true ideology, which was fundamentally opposed to Marxist socialism.
If the quote was real, it was likely in relation to Strasserism. The Strasser Brothers were the main opposition to Hitler's Faction in the Nazi Party. Hitler didn't create the Nazi Party. Hitler joined the party a year later and didn't become its party leader until two years after it was founded.
But that doesn't mean it was left wing, Strasserism was still a far right party but its economics was more left wing while its social policy and was still very right wing.
Hitler was against the Strasserism approach to economics and instead was trying to court the support of wealthy industrialists and big business. So in this sense, Strasserism would be considered to the left of Hitler. But Strasserism is still part of the Nazi Party which is and always will be a far right party.
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?
no it just shows that Trump is an autocrat who ignores the biggest contributors of political violence which is he and his base .
Or, maybe, that governments are increasingly prone to targeting the political opposition.
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”.
People are cheerleading Kirk’s death not the shooter. And they are a small percentage. Terminally online people don’t represent the entire base
That is a distinction without a difference. And I don't think that percentage is as small as you think.
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.
Yea so were the people who lynched Emmitt Till
And so was the Duke Lacrosse team. What's the point of even having a court system? Clearly anybody who's charged is guilty.
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.
The Helldivers "slogan" is actually a series of arrows that ends with three down arrows. Three down arrows is an Antifa symbol too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Arrows
So it seems likely it's a double reference.
I actually played Helldivers 2 for a while before I got bored with it, and the controller sequence to call down the 500 kg bomb is one of the easiest in the game to remember, compared to others that are 10-12 inputs. That's probably why I focused on it.
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.
Define fascist
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian political ideology characterized by dictatorial power, extreme nationalism, forcible suppression of opposition, rigid social hierarchy, and strong control over society and the economy, often with militaristic and racist elements. It subordinates individual interests to those of the nation or a perceived racial group.
"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.
What are you reading?!? Everything I've read says just the opposite. He hated Kirk for not being MAGA enough and sided with Fuentes on this.
And he wasn't his"Trans boyfriend ". He was roommate that dressed up like JD Vance did in drag. Do we need to shown you those pics too?
Then you are deep in a misinformation hole. Nothing of that is true.
Go read updates from the official investigations. Watch the press events if you need to. In fact so far nothing the Daily Mail has reported is false, it's all sourced directly back to the US government and they haven't yet made mistakes, but if you want to ignore it then go ahead and find the other sources. They're all getting their information from the same place after all.
And then you should accept that you don't know how to judge the reliability of information on the internet, because your response to being shown that your beliefs are false was to stick your fingers in your ears and say "la la can't hear you".
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15096571/Trans-partner-Charlie-Kirk-killer-Tyler-Robinson.html
https://substack.com/profile/38370926-slaw/note/c-156341117
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.
Becky, January 6th is all the Left have and we now know much of was PsyOp!
Wrong! It’s so sad to be you if you’re still duped by tge corrupt, facist right-wing ideology.
Wrong on every point:
1. Twitter is “more heavily” right than what? You don’t even tell us in your unintelligible diatribe. It is definitely more heavily right than it was before Musk took it over, but to your twisted thinking it seems “more heavily” right because before it was almost exclusively dominated by libtards.
2. What we mean by “pro-murder right wing sentiment” is that when we see the unhinged celebration of Charlie Kirk’s death from bloodthirsty Leftists, we are awakened to the fact that many of your comrades would also celebrate the death of people who hold similar views as Charlie if they dare profess them. Half the country believes many of the things that Charlie stood for and morally bankrupt Leftists want us dead!
3. All you clowns have is January 6 and what has been revealed subsequent to that time is that were actually FBI agents in crowd inciting the protesters and Nancy Pelosi restrained the National Guard. January 6 was allowed to happen and has been your only talking point since.
Becky, Conservative’s were under the delusion that the Left’s assertion that speech is violence and thus it is legitimate to physically attack and even kill someone for saying things that hurt people’s feelings could not be true. It’s been made abundantly clear by the gleeful public reactions of teachers, healthcare professionals and even those who profess to be religious that it is true and we in the right are in danger. Hopefully, if you haven’t been to brainwashed you can one day acknowledge that many on your side of the aisle are part of a death cult and you can turn away from that evil. Unfortunately, by your accusations of fascism you are definitely deeply deluded already. You can’t even recognize the fact that it is your side using the tactics of fascists. Do you see the members of Antifa in the streets? They actually dress like Mussolini’s Blackshirts! I will pray for you but will have to block you because at this point any further discussion is fruitless.
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
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.
It’s about what’s right not about what’s popular. Gay marriage didn’t get majority support from the public until 2012. Support for interracial marriage in this country didn’t get over 50% support until the mid 1990s.
As always culture will shift left and you people who want to violate and harm people’s rights and civil liberties will look out of touch again but of course you all will find way to push revisionist history on everything like you people always do
It sure looks to me like culture is shifting right currently.
Plus you are being selective on your issues. The left in this country used to oppose the death penalty and advocate for gun control. Over the last few decades it has become easier and easier to purchase and carry a firearm in the majority of the country. At the same time liberal opposition to the death penalty has evaporated.
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.
but the nazi's weren't that. They were wildly anti-immigrant, wildly reactionary, anti-semetic and maintained capitalism. Public services expanded for the purposes of expanding that "Pure" ideology of what a german was supposed to be. it wasn't for everyone. If you think even for a minute Nazi's were a left wing ideology or even close to one, i have a bridge to sell you.
Yes, public services only expanded for the 99% of the population that was ethnic Germans. I guess is doesn't count then.
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."
Quit gaslighting us. What is Nazi an abbreviation for; Nationalsozialist, or "National Socialist". What Nazi are is in their name. Because of Leftist brainwashing you don’t even know what Nazi’s were.
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.
Lmfao. Citing your own substack. You’re a dipshit dude. No one’s reading that garbage.
Who should I believe actual historians and scholars or some random dipshit with a substack account? Yea I’ll take the holocaust encyclopedia. They know more than you
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-nazi-party-1
“The National Socialist German Workers’ Party—also known as the Nazi Party—was the far-right racist and antisemitic political party led by Adolf Hitler. The Nazi Party came to power in Germany in 1933. It controlled all aspects of German life and persecuted German Jews. Its power only ended when Germany lost World War II.”
And people like you still compare right-left spectrum through US politics while ignoring right wing politics being different in many ways than what is considered right wing in the USA. Right wing view points in Europe and elsewhere has always defending statism and has been critical of free markets.
Get out of your bubble and stop posting your shitty substack. No one’s going to read that
Let me ask you a question:
Can you name one non-Communist regime that implemented more socialistic economic and social policies than the German National Socialist regime in the 1930s/40s?
LOL
Anyone who immediately resorts to name-calling knows that they have no evidence to support their case.
Such an insightful response from someone who is obviously an esteemed historian.
If you prefer books, then you can read my book series instead. Or view its bibliography, which has hundreds of sources. Or do you want to verify my PhD from Brown University in Political Science?
And stop pretending that you actually read the article. I never said anything about Left/Right. As I mentioned in the article (which you did not actually read), the terms are not very useful in describing totalitarian regimes. Communists, Fascists and National Socialists share far more in common with each other than differences.
The question is whether National Socialists are actually Socialist.
At the bottom, I cite multiple books by historians of the period. But then again, you did not get that far, did you?
Ah yes the holocaust encyclopedia. There would be know reason for Jews who themselves are supporters of Leftist ideology to contend that National Socialism is right wing, You are truly pathetic.
No sir, your assessments are totally absurd. Look at the policies that the Nazi enforced and endorsed. A take over of all businesses in the country. Free heath care for the masses. Of course they targeted other political parties, that’s what totalitarians do. They installed Socialists policies because that’s what socialist do. If it walks like a duck and talks like it is duck. In the case of Nazi they actually told you who they are; National Socialists. Start thinking for yourself rather than referring to leftist historians who have an agenda to taint Conservatives who believe in limited government and free markets as Nazis. It’s laughable.
Why are you still here? You are just flat out wrong about this. The Nazi party and Nazism same with fascism are far right. You are living in your own bubble thinking the rest of the worlds conservatism or right wing politics is the same as the United States. Far right politicians in Europe even to this day, are not free market capitalists. Marine Le Pen of France, that the far right loves including Trump and his base. Had more socialistic economic policies than the actual French socialist party candidate.
The far right and right wing parties in Europe and elsewhere across the world are not free market capitalists but that does not mean that it means they are left wing. Right wing politics in other parts of the world is pro statist and pro government taking control of things.
Like every low IQ American, you think only in your bubble. Universal Healthcare literally exists in capitalist Singapore and capitalist Hong Kong along with every other capitalist country on earth besides the USA.
You’re a moron who thinks historians are leftists but then want to push your own revisionist propaganda that comes not
From historians or scholars but right wing pundits who are trying to push lies and propaganda to the masses. You’re just wrong. Take the L and f*ck off
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.
Amusing that racists like Dylann Roof are classified as Right wing. This stems from the fact that the Left and their allies in the MSM have falsely branded Conservatives and the Political Right as racists, conveniently ignoring the fact that the founders of KKK were Democrats! There are no Conservatives who support White Supremacist or white Nationalism.
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
You clearly have no idea of Kirk’s opinion about the civil rights. You are just pushing the Lefts lies about Kirk’s statements that were totally taken out of context.
Actually, I do and he has stated it multiple times on his podcast and an interview that he thought the civil rights act was a bad mistake and he has also hated on Martin Luther King multiple times. These are just the facts.
As always you take his comments out of context to advance your narrative. Kirk reached out to AAs in a way that sadly few Conservatives do. There are many AAs paying tribute to him countering the hatred coming from people like you.
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.
Social Security and Medicare aren't socialist
Obamacare isn't socialist
Student loan forgiveness isn't socialism
Democrats don't support subsidies to corporations
Green New Deal was something AOC proposed as a set of ideals not an actual policy
You are wrong on all points. Medicare and Social Security are obviously Socialized programs. What aspect of either of them involve freedom of the individual to participate? Everything you say demonstrates a total lack of understanding what Socialism is.
So what you’re trying to tell me is that a move to install federal control over both healthcare and higher education is not a move toward socialism? Quit gaslighting us clown.
Green new deal was never supported by the DNC
Obamacare is a hand out to corporations, it is a public/private partnership inline with neoliberal values. It does not provide a public competitor to corporations so they can continue to price gouge.
Student loans aren't socialism, what?
Social Security and Medicare were created eons ago and supported by both parties overwhelmingly. Its been slowly gutted by both democrats and republicans.
Government subsidized loans to businesses is consistent with neoliberalism. Neoliberalism utilizes government power to prop up and accelerate capitalism. Its the whole, socialism for business, capitalism for people. The banks can't fail but the people can rot.
You clearly don’t have the facts or wish to gaslight us. Of course Obamacare was a move toward socialized medicine. It forced everyone to buy health insurance whether they wanted it or not. Obama also eliminated Private Lending for student loans essentially making taxpayers liable for all student loans. Essentially this is socialism, since many of the loans will be forgiven. While you are right that Republicans voted for SS, Medicare and Medicaid it is Democrats who have blocked any reforms to these programs that would make them sustainable. No Democrat has admitted they want open borders, they clearly do or they would have kept policies Trump had in his 1st term. Evidence of your false claim is the fact that the border was essentially closed during the 1st 3 months of Trumps second term!
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.
Biden literally did not have any open border policies at all. He literally expanded on Trumps immigration policies
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/01/05/biden-expands-trump-era-border-restrictions-once-again
Biden never pushed for a wealth tax. He might have briefly said something in favor of it but never actually pushed that policy into actual legislation.
Open borders also isn't "socialism".
Supporting trans rights isn't far left. But thinking those people are vermin and wanting to remove all of their rights is 100% far right.
Supporting civil rights for people should never be considered far left and if it is considered that to some people. Then that is an issue with the modern day republican party clearly being pro authoritarian and against civil rights.
Listen dipshit I am further right than most people you will meet and I don’t endorse anything that you are claiming we support and there are very few if any that do.
1. Trans people are not vermin. They are people with a mental illness called gender dysphoria. They should receive psychiatric care and be allowed to transition as a last resort after at least receiving 2 years of therapy.
2. If you knew anything about Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, you would know that the majority of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for them. There is no modern day Republican that is against civil rights.
Because of your bigotry you attempt to tarnish all Republican with the broad brush of racism and transphobia. Get a brain.
Oh look, you failed immediately. NO DEMOCRATS at all, not a single one has advocated for open borders. Every democrat president and legislature has increased deportations and seizures in the last 20 years and funding over prior admins. Biden oversaw one of the largest increases to ICE funding since Trump. Failed 1/3
Biden and Kamala both floated the idea of capital gains taxes and both refused to ever even attempt to implement them. Capital gains tax proposal exist entirely as a way to counter ultra wealthy people avoiding taxation by getting paid in stocks and options and of course, the refused to even try to implement them because they know who feeds them. those same ultra wealthy donors. Failed 2/3
Transgender people exist. The DNC is adamantly against outwardly supporting them. Kamala Harris was so barred from even trying she refused to commit to outward support and only said "She would follow the law". This isn't even a leftist or socialist policy. this is just basic human decency to acknowledge trans people exist. Something we've acknowledged for hundreds of years.
1/Fail. Of course no Democrats have advocated for open borders.
It would be politically indefensible. But you judge politicians by what they do not their campaign speeches . Over 10 million illegal aliens crossed the border during the Biden’s term. He did nothing to stop it because that’s what his party wants.
2/Fail. You seem to confuse Capital Gains taxes with Wealth tax. The idea of a Wealth Tax was proposed but never taken seriously because it is impossible to administer.
3/ Fail. No one denies the existence of people who believe they are transgender. Clearly, the Democrat party supports transgender ideology; they flew the LGBTQ flag over the WH and allowed transgenders in the military and supported tax payers paying for their transition in prison as well the military.
Thanks Pete, you understand and clarify my point.
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.
You see Racist symbols everywhere don’t you asshole? You have about as much brain power as AOC and Jasmine Crockett, 2 of the more intelligent members of the Democrat Party. Enjoy your life you pathetic loser. I’m done here. There’s no hope for you!
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?
Trotsky was a communist. But Hitler wasn't a leftist. And nothing you say will change that reality
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.
First of all, what you cited was Hitler's Table Talks which has been completely discredited as not a reliable source of information. This is literally just common knowledge. There were huge issues especially with the English and French versions and the original German notes were not a verbatim transcript but a filtered and edited account of Hitler's monologues.
The German text, which the French and English editions are said to be based upon, was, for reasons that are unclear, not published until 1980. So Werner Jochmann was not even taking the original german notes which have now been lost but was translating the English and French version which came out first and published that version in German. Well its now proven the English and French version was filled with inaccuracies, mistranslations, and outright made up statements. And the version Werner Jochmann wrote in German came directly from the fraudulent French and English version.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-143713248?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/15035
"The English translation I already demonstrated to be fraudulent, based on the heavily and bizarrely distorted French translation of Genoud. But even the German text (of which there are multiple disagreeing versions) intermingles the views of each entry’s authors and editors with Hitler’s, takes Hitler’s comments out of context and even creates new context for them, mistakes the comments of others present as Hitler’s, and is drawn at best from loose memory a day after the fact, by three or four different persons at different times, after countless things were discussed by numerous people. And then all was edited and added to by Bormann. (And possibly meddled with by Genoud!)"
--
On top of that, even if that quote was real. You are also taking it out of context. That monologue is 368 pages long and you took one paragraph out of that. It is already common knowledge that Hitler tried to also appeal to those on the left to cast a wider tent and to have larger support.
Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party deliberately used rhetoric and platform points meant to appeal to and co-opt working-class and other leftist voters. However, this "socialist" messaging was a superficial tactic to expand the Nazis' voter base and did not represent the party's true ideology, which was fundamentally opposed to Marxist socialism.
If the quote was real, it was likely in relation to Strasserism. The Strasser Brothers were the main opposition to Hitler's Faction in the Nazi Party. Hitler didn't create the Nazi Party. Hitler joined the party a year later and didn't become its party leader until two years after it was founded.
But that doesn't mean it was left wing, Strasserism was still a far right party but its economics was more left wing while its social policy and was still very right wing.
Hitler was against the Strasserism approach to economics and instead was trying to court the support of wealthy industrialists and big business. So in this sense, Strasserism would be considered to the left of Hitler. But Strasserism is still part of the Nazi Party which is and always will be a far right party.
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