5 ms·

"bracing" ? we already have it. In order of approximately most significant to least significant acts of political violence just in the last 6 months: * The a

• Forgeties79 1y ago
  What drives me crazy is, in a rare moment for me, I will acknowledge that it’s been morphing into a “both sides” issue in the last 24mo or so. I just generally reject “both sides” arguments because it’s so often a cheap hand wavy way to say “I don’t care/won’t look under the hood on this” without having to say it while ignoring the fundamental truth of “two wrongs don’t make a right.” And yet I still have people insist it’s all “left wing Marxists” or whatever their favorite term is these days. Like we can’t even agree political violence is ratcheting up broadly and it’s a problem we ALL have to deal with. Partisanship is a hell of a drug. Edit: several recent attempts/successful perpetrators, including Kirk’s killer, were not clearly right or left. There have been some leftwing incidents but they are certainly fewer than others. I am not saying left wing violence is as bad as right wing violence. But it’s not all right wing anymore. That’s all I’m saying.
  • alephnerd 1y ago
    The fact you got downvoted is symptomatic of the larger issue you identified.
    • deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    • Forgeties79 1y ago
      Meh it’s whatever. I know what I waded in to
  • mcphage 1y ago
    > I will acknowledge that it’s been morphing into a “both sides” issue in the last 24mo or so. Has it been? How so?
    • Forgeties79 1y ago
      The violence we’ve seen in the last ~24mo involves a broader range of political ideologies. The last decade right wing political violence has been noticeably higher overall for sure. i’m not going to bother responding to every single person who asks this question so hopefully they see this before they all dog pile with the same question lol
  • postflopclarity 1y ago
    it might be a "both sides" issue in terms of opinion polls like this, but empirically right-wing political violence in the US is consistently, statistically, and significantly, more lethal
  • nitwit005 1y ago
    Our current government seems to want to provoke a reaction. Constantly talking about sending troops into cities, calling democrats terrorists, and all the other vitriol, certainly isn't intended to create a sense of peace and comfort. If you constantly try to make people angry, eventually you succeed.
    • Forgeties79 1y ago
      No argument here
  • pstuart 1y ago
    [flagged]
    • gruez 1y ago
      >The Charlie Kirk assassination was instantly weaponized to be blamed on the Left, despite no evidence to support that claim. More so, there's effectively been zero details about the suspect and his motivations. Are you talking about in the immediate aftermath or currently? For the latter it seems pretty safe to conclude he was probably left-leaning politically, even if he wasn't a card carrying DSA member or whatever? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Charlie_Kirk#Views_and_possible_motives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Charlie_Kirk#...
      • atmavatar 1y ago
        For the latter it seems pretty safe to conclude he was probably left-leaning politically All we know for sure is that he's left of his MAGA parents when it comes to gay/trans rights. It's not uncommon for right-leaning individuals to suddenly discover the humanity of groups they previously hated once they spend significant time with one of their members. However, there are plenty of conservative viewpoints that do not hinge on prejudice, so I'll wait for more evidence before believing he went full vegan hippie liberal. A picture of the guy in a drum circle or animal cruelty protest while wearing a Che Guevara or tie dye and peace sign shirt would do ;)
        • gruez 1y ago
          >All we know for sure is that he's left of his MAGA parents when it comes to gay/trans rights. "left of his MAGA parents when it comes to gay/trans rights" is an understatement. From the wikipedia article: >When the roommate asked why Robinson had done it, he answered, "I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated out." Maybe he was some sort of libertarian that thinks "hatred" from right wing influencers needed to be stoped via exercise of the second amendment, but you really have to bend backwards for that theory. The far more plausible explanation is that he was a run-of-the-mill illiberal-left that thinks speech from the right need to be curtailed. When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras.
  • twojacobtwo 1y ago
    Vurtually anyone saying "left wing Marxists" in the US, in reference to an organized movement, is full of shit and/or fully captured by the American propaganda waves still echoing from the the red scare era of the 1940s and 50s. These people are the type to call literally any social safety net "communist". America has been pulled so far to the right in the last 70+ years that the average voter now seems to think 'the left' starts at authoritarian communism.
• xg15 1y ago
  I mean, look at the GenZ protests in other parts of the world that have successfully brought down several governments. The US is still "just" in the "lone wolf" phase of political violence.
• gojomo 1y ago
  Plot these against the rate of similar attempts (or successes) over the past century if you want to convince others of anything other than your own subjective presentist perspective.
  • postflopclarity 1y ago
    the Hortman murder was the first assassination of a sitting legislator at the state or federal level in my lifetime, which feels pretty significant. I'm looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_politicians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_... and I stand by my "subjective perspective" as remaining pretty reasonable. let me know what specifically you wanted me to plot
    • gojomo 1y ago
      The Wikipedia page is useful, and as you've identified the 2025 MN Representative Hortman murder as the "first assassination of a sitting legislator at the state or federal level in my lifetime" – not counting the 2015 murder of SC Senator Pinckney – is it safe to assume you're a precociously-posting 10-year-old? I was born in 1970; per your reference, there've been a bunch of state & federal legislators (or recently-former legislators) killed for political (or pseudo-political deranged) motives "in my lifetime" – and far more in the 1970s than in the last 10 years. In my lifetime, one sitting President was shot at & missed (Ford in 1976), and one was shot at & hit by a ricochet (Reagan in 1981) – again, more in the past than the shots that grazed candidate Trump in 2024. The Wikipedia-listed murders of other officeholders, like mayors or judges, are also more frequent in the past than recently – especially going before either of our lifetimes. So trend impressions are very subject to frames of reference & familiarity with history. I suspect if people in general had a deeper & broader sense of how common political violence has been, both in US history & worldwide, they'd be, on the one hand, less prone to panic over recent events & rhetoric (even though it is concerning), but also on the other hand more appreciative of the relative peace of recent decades (even with the last few years' events).
      • postflopclarity 1y ago
• charlescearl 1y ago
  - The excess deaths experienced by unhoused persons - The excess deaths of persons that live in in the so-called Cancer Alley https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/the-shocking-hazards-of-louisianas-cancer-alley https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/the-shocking-hazards-of-lo... - The persistent excess deaths of those incarcerated in american prisons https://www.vera.org/news/the-hidden-deaths-in-american-jails https://www.vera.org/news/the-hidden-deaths-in-american-jail... - The american mass shootings in 2025 https://massshootingtracker.site/ https://massshootingtracker.site/ - The internationalized violence of ICE arrests and attacks https://www.npr.org/2025/10/23/nx-s1-5538090/ice-detention-custody-immigration-arrest-enforcement-dhs-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/10/23/nx-s1-5538090/ice-detention-c... These are all instances of political violence. The political class in the united states deemed particular populations disposable, and enacted policies that lead to excess deaths and extreme violence upon those populations. Millions in the united states live under the threat of state violence and politcally accepted exposure to premature death. The article and comments refer to the resulting counter-violence that perpetrators of the un-remarked systemic violence may become exposed to.
  • postflopclarity 1y ago
    I kind of agree with you in spirit, but I was more meaning to refer to terrorism / acts of violence against high profile public officials.
    • IAmBroom 1y ago
      Yes, but charlescearl has bolstered, broadened, and built upon your narrower example.
  • satisfice 1y ago
    Homeless people must be so happy now that people acknowledge that they can feel at home without a house to live in. There never was a problem with homelessness, I am sure they would say. (this is sarcasm) But doesn’t “unhoused” sound a little too much like “unhinged?” Has anyone checked whether being referred to as a “person” might be offensive to men and women and boys and girls who have more specific identities? (this is not sarcastic)
• I_Am_Nous 1y ago
  One of the big ones I remember from the last decade was the Congressional baseball shooting in 2017, where luckily nobody was killed. This isn't a sudden problem to brace for, it's a continuing problem to finally accept and address. Charlie Kirk was not an elected public official, but he was definitely still political in a way that a lot of regular Americans are political. So even if it's less significant with regard to elected officials being targeted, it was political violence that regular people felt and could conceive of being targeted with, for similar reasons as Charlie. I believe that was what made his assassination resonate with people, much more than an elected official being assassinated does.
• ggreer 1y ago
  If we're counting in the past six months, the list should also include the Capital Jewish Museum shooting, the Boulder Molotov cocktail attack, and the shootings at ICE facilities in Alvarado & Dallas.
  • IAmBroom 1y ago
    And the ICE arrests, in general, which have greatly increased.
  • postflopclarity 1y ago
    I was going for attacks on specific high profile individuals. there were indeed these events and more others if we're counting all politically-motivated terrorism.
• phantasmish 1y ago
  A new rise of political violence was clearly coming in when Trump told his supporters, on camera, in front of a crowd, that they ought to shoot Hillary if she won—and then he not only still had an active campaign a week later, but went on to win the election. That was a huge "oh shit" moment. The rest of this isn't exactly a consequence of specifically what he said, but is something that one could predict from that and other things he said and did in the first election and his first term. The fact that he said what he said and that was no longer regarded as abhorrent by enough people to keep him from even getting close to the Presidency, was the sign.
  • mike1320 1y ago
    [flagged]
• rickydroll 1y ago
  Did you notice that the photographs taken at that event showed that his right ear was bloodied, implying that it was damaged by the bullet passing by. Believable, kinda. But then the Time photo showing his Georgia O'Keeffe neck also showed his completely intact right ear. The attempt in itself is not just political violence, but also provides grounds for justifying violence against "enemies."
  • EPWN3D 1y ago
    I'd agree except that we appear to have just memory-holed the attempted assassination of Trump during his campaign. And he never talks about it either. Until you posted this, I'd completely forgotten about it.
• miamibre 1y ago
  Exactly! People who think that the vitriol is just cordoned off to social media haven't been paying attention to the very real spillover that has already claimed lives. I think the issue is that mainstream media like movies showcases political violence as very well organized and full of manifestos when the majority of these attempts are very poorly planned and the people carrying it out clearly have mental disorders so it's very hard to pinpoint what ideology they are promoting. I also believe that these recent attempts have showcased that the current political establishment has been doing an awful job at reconciliation and instead pouring gasoline by refusing to make a joint statements condemning the violence or making any sort of gesture that isn't blatantly bipartisan. If you look at the political violence of the 60's and 70's in the US, there's a lot of overlap but at least the government took steps to not only keep it under control but congress actually took steps in dealing with the hot button issues. Nowadays it seems like we're just kicking the can down the road and blaming the other side for it. I mean just look at the current shutdown and tell me if this state of affairs won't result in further anger and people taking action with their own hands rather than rely on political institutions.
• michael1999 1y ago
  Don't forget Gabby Giffords and Steve Scalise.
• locopati 1y ago
  and almost all of it committed by people with right-wing views