What are the most notable instances of left-wing and right-wing violence in recent years?

1. Summary of the results

The data reveals a significant shift in domestic terrorism patterns in recent years, with 2025 marking a historic turning point in political violence trends. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, left-wing terrorist attacks outnumbered those from the violent far right for the first time in over 30 years ^{[1] [2]}. This represents a dramatic reversal from the historical pattern where right-wing extremist violence dominated domestic terrorism statistics.

Right-wing violence has historically been the more lethal and frequent form of domestic terrorism. Data shows that approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001 have been attributed to right-wing extremism ^[3]. However, 2025 saw a significant plunge in right-wing terror attacks, which researchers attribute to President Donald Trump's 2024 election victory ^[2]. The theory suggests that Trump's aggressive actions on immigration and targeting of the "deep state" may have reduced the perceived need for extremists to act violently ^[2].

Left-wing violence, while traditionally accounting for only 10% to 15% of incidents and less than 5% of fatalities ^[3], has experienced a notable surge. The rise includes five left-wing attacks and plots in 2025 ^[2], driven by a combination of anti-government extremism and partisan extremism ^[1]. These attacks have primarily targeted government and law enforcement facilities ^[2], including specific incidents involving Antifa-aligned domestic terrorists attacking law enforcement and ICE facilities ^[4].

Notable recent incidents include the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the shooting of Minnesota Democratic state Rep. Melissa Hortman, assassination attempts on Trump in 2024, and attacks on the New Mexico Republican Party headquarters and CDC headquarters ^[5]. Despite the increase in frequency, left-wing attacks have remained less lethal than their right-wing counterparts, with only two fatalities since 2020 ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses reveal several critical contextual factors often overlooked in discussions of political violence. Social media, anger, distrust, and conspiracy theories serve as significant contributing factors to violence from both sides of the political spectrum ^[5]. Additionally, the availability of guns and underfunding of mental health care have enabled dangerous individuals to act without intervention ^[5].

A particularly important finding is that both sides greatly overestimate their opponent's willingness to endorse violent actions, creating a dangerous environment where extremists can rationalize using violence ^[2]. This mutual misperception fuels a cycle of escalation that benefits from addressing the underlying psychological and social dynamics rather than focusing solely on ideological differences.

The historical context shows that left-wing violence has included campaigns by groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front in the 1990s and 2000s, involving arson and vandalism ^[3]. This demonstrates that left-wing extremism has deep roots beyond recent anti-Trump sentiment.

The government response has evolved significantly, with the current administration issuing a presidential memorandum directing the National Joint Terrorism Task Force to investigate networks that foment political violence and develop funding programs for law enforcement partners ^[6]. The Department of Homeland Security has also intensified efforts against Antifa violence, making arrests and filing charges against perpetrators ^[4].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself appears relatively neutral in seeking information about both left-wing and right-wing violence. However, the framing could potentially lead to false equivalency if not properly contextualized with the actual data showing the historical dominance of right-wing violence in terms of lethality and frequency.

The analyses suggest potential temporal bias in how violence is perceived and reported. The recent surge in left-wing violence in 2025 might overshadow the decades-long pattern of right-wing dominance in domestic terrorism fatalities ^[3]. This could lead to mischaracterizing the overall threat landscape if recent trends are extrapolated without historical context.

Additionally, the correlation between political leadership and violence patterns ^[2] suggests that external political factors significantly influence extremist behavior, indicating that violence levels may be more situational and reactive than ideologically predetermined. This complexity challenges simplistic narratives about inherent violence tendencies in either political wing.

The sources also indicate that both law enforcement agencies and research institutions are actively tracking and responding to these trends, suggesting that the data reflects genuine security concerns rather than partisan political positioning.