Right-Wing Political Violence Surges, Outpacing Left-Wing Incidents

The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025, has reignited the debate over politically motivated violence in the United States. Following Kirk’s death, President Donald Trump claimed that radical leftist groups are primarily responsible for political violence, stating, “The radical left causes tremendous violence.” He called for these groups to be jailed, reflecting a narrative echoed by his senior advisor, Stephen Miller, who referred to left-wing organizations as a “vast domestic terror movement.”

Despite these claims, recent research on extremism presents a different picture. Analysis indicates that the majority of politically motivated violence in the United States is linked to right-wing extremism. This assertion challenges the prevailing rhetoric and highlights the need for reliable evidence to understand the dynamics of political violence.

Understanding Political Violence in America

The rise of political violence in the U.S. has been marked by alarming trends. A significant number of states reported threats against election workers during the 2024 election cycle, with incidents of intimidation and doxing becoming increasingly common. Kirk’s assassination underscores this growing threat. The individual charged with his murder, Tyler Robinson, allegedly planned the attack through written preparations and online communications. This incident follows other politically charged killings, including the assassination of Melissa Hortman, a Democratic state representative in Minnesota, and her husband.

The normalization of political violence poses severe risks to democratic practices. It is crucial to define “political violence” accurately to grasp its implications. The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security define domestic violent extremism as violence or credible threats intended to influence government policy or intimidate civilians for political purposes. This broad definition encompasses various activities, complicating the analysis of specific incidents.

Patterns and Data on Political Violence

Research indicates that right-wing extremist violence has been deadlier than left-wing violence in recent years. An analysis of domestic terrorism fatalities reveals that right-wing extremism accounted for approximately 75 to 80 percent of deaths from domestic terrorism in the U.S. since 2001. Notable incidents include the 2015 Charleston church shooting, the 2018 Tree of Life Synagogue attack, and the 2019 El Paso Walmart massacre. By contrast, left-wing extremist incidents represent about 10 to 15 percent of such events, with fatalities typically being much lower.

The impact of politically motivated violence extends beyond the immediate harm. In the first half of 2025, research from the University of Maryland found that 35 percent of violent events targeted government personnel or facilities. Such attacks emphasize the symbolic nature of political violence and its potential to influence public perception and policy.

Counting and characterizing political violence remains complex due to differing definitions and reporting mechanisms. The U.S. government does not have a formal process to designate domestic terrorism, relying instead on existing legal frameworks to prosecute violence. This approach complicates the distinction between criminal acts and politically motivated violence, making it challenging to provide a comprehensive overview.

While threats and violence from political extremism are relatively rare compared to overall violent crime, their implications are significant. The rhetoric surrounding political violence often calls for heightened governmental action, yet the empirical evidence suggests that violence is concentrated within specific movements rather than dispersed across the political spectrum.

In summary, the predominant narrative framing left-wing groups as the primary instigators of political violence does not align with the available data. Research indicates that right-wing ideologies are more frequently associated with lethal attacks. As the debate continues, understanding the reality of political violence in the U.S. will be crucial for policymakers and the public alike.

Art Jipson and Paul J. Becker, both associate professors of sociology at the University of Dayton, contributed to this analysis, underscoring the importance of basing discussions on factual evidence rather than rhetoric.