What percentage of non-fatal political violence is committed by left-wing actors versus right wing actors.

1. Summary of the results

The analyses provided suggest that right-wing actors are responsible for a significantly higher percentage of non-fatal political violence compared to left-wing actors ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. According to ^[1], right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001, while left-wing extremist incidents have made up about 10% to 15% of incidents and less than 5% of fatalities. Similarly, ^[2] reports that all 13 extremist-related murders in 2024 were committed by right-wing extremists, with 8 of the killings involving white supremacists and the remaining 5 having connections to far-right anti-government extremists ^[2]. Additionally, ^[3] documents 213 cases of political violence since the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, resulting in at least 39 deaths, with most of the deadly outbursts tracked coming from the right ^[3]. Left-wing actors, on the other hand, are less likely to be violent, as noted by ^[5] and ^[5], which find that radical acts perpetrated by individuals associated with left-wing causes are less likely to be violent ^[5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some key context missing from the original statement includes the timeframe and geographic location of the non-fatal political violence, as well as the definition of non-fatal political violence. The analyses provided focus primarily on the United States, with some sources examining global trends ^[5]. The timeframe of the analyses also varies, with some sources examining data since 2001 ^[1] and others looking at more recent trends ^{[2] [3]}. Alternative viewpoints, such as the role of Islamist extremists in non-fatal political violence, are also mentioned in some analyses ^{[6] [5]}. For example, ^[6] states that since 1975, Islamist terrorists are responsible for 87% of murders in attacks on US soil, while right-wingers account for 11% and left-wingers for about 2% ^[6].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be biased towards implying a false equivalence between left-wing and right-wing actors in terms of non-fatal political violence, as the analyses provided suggest that right-wing actors are responsible for a significantly higher percentage of such violence ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. Additionally, the statement may be lacking in context, as it does not provide a clear definition of non-fatal political violence or specify the timeframe and geographic location of the violence. This lack of context may benefit those who seek to downplay the role of right-wing extremism in non-fatal political violence, as it allows for the implication that left-wing and right-wing actors are equally responsible for such violence ^[5]. On the other hand, the statement may also benefit those who seek to emphasize the threat of right-wing extremism, as it provides a clear question that can be answered with data showing the disproportionate role of right-wing actors in non-fatal political violence ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.