Left-Wing Political Violence Remains an Ongoing Existential Threat to America
Source: Brianna Lyman. "Left-Wing Violence Is Still An Existential Threat To The Republic." September 10, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that even after Charlie Kirk's assassination, left-wing political violence hasn't stopped and remains a serious danger to America. She points to survey data showing liberals are more likely to justify violence, several incidents involving people identified as leftists (bombing plots, assassination attempts, violent rhetoric from Democratic candidates), and an election where a Democrat with violent statements won, as evidence that the political left has normalized or tolerated violence.
Conclusion
Left-wing violence is still a real and dangerous threat to the republic, despite Charlie Kirk's assassination that should have served as a watershed moment to end political violence.
Premises
- Charlie Kirk was assassinated by a left-winger obsessed with transgender ideology, an event that should have been a turning point against political violence.
- Post-assassination polling showed a notably higher percentage of self-identified liberals (especially 'very liberal') than conservatives believe political violence can be justified.
- Similar polling showed liberals were more likely than conservatives to say it's acceptable to feel happy about a public figure's death.
- A man was arrested on bomb charges near a Supreme Court-related Mass weeks after Kirk's assassination.
- Virginia Democrats elected Jay Jones as Attorney General despite revelations he fantasized about murdering a Republican colleague and his children.
- Four leftist extremists were arrested for allegedly planning bombings and an ambush on ICE officers.
- Trump faced another assassination attempt in April by an armed individual who breached Secret Service security.
- Democrat Elliot Forhan ran for Ohio Attorney General on a platform of 'legally' killing Trump, indicating a permissive culture around political violence within the party.
Assumptions
- Individual acts of violence or extreme rhetoric by self-identified leftists or Democrats can be generalized to represent 'the left' as a political movement.
- Polling data on hypothetical justification of violence reliably predicts actual propensity for real-world violent action.
- Electoral support for a candidate with violent statements implies voter endorsement of political violence rather than other factors (e.g., party loyalty, policy priorities).
- There is no need to comparably analyze right-wing violence or violent rhetoric to assess relative threat levels.
- A single election outcome (Jay Jones) reflects broader Democratic Party values on political violence rather than local political dynamics.