What motives and ideologies have driven major left-wing and right-wing shootings since 2020?
Executive summary
Since 2020, shootings motivated by extremist ideologies have been driven by distinct but sometimes overlapping motives: right-wing attacks have largely stemmed from white‑supremacist, anti-government, anti‑minority and misogynist beliefs and have been deadlier in sheer fatalities, while left‑wing attacks have trended toward partisan anti‑government grievances, targeted actions against law enforcement or government officials, and causes tied to social movements such as solidarity with Palestinians or environmentalism; multiple datasets and expert analyses confirm right‑wing violence remains the more lethal and frequent threat overall even amid episodic spikes in left‑wing incidents [1] [2] [3].
1. The statistical landscape: frequency and lethality
Empirical work and government‑level reviews show right‑wing extremist violence accounted for the majority of politically motivated U.S. fatalities in recent years, with analysts estimating roughly three‑quarters of domestic terrorism deaths since 2001 were attributable to right‑wing actors and multiple datasets noting higher lethality from the far right compared with the far left [1] [4] [2]; selective analyses since 2020 identify left‑wing incidents rising in number in certain periods, but total left‑wing fatalities remained far lower than right‑wing totals in most datasets [3] [5].
2. Motives and ideologies behind right‑wing shootings
Right‑wing shooters frequently cite racial and ethnic supremacy, anti‑immigrant and anti‑government sentiment, misogyny (including “incel” narratives), opposition to LGBTQ+ rights and abortion, and conspiracy belief systems like QAnon as motivating ideologies, and researchers link these frames to attacks that have produced some of the highest death tolls in recent decades [6] [4] [7]; reporting and scholarly reviews also document that many right‑wing plots and attacks are animated by a sense that government or cultural change is existentially threatening, which can translate into mass casualty intent or targeted political assassinations [6] [8].
3. Motives and ideologies behind left‑wing shootings
Analysts characterise the contemporary left‑wing incidents as driven by anti‑government and partisan extremism, opposition to capitalism or perceived state injustices, black‑nationalist impulses in isolated cases, and solidarity actions tied to international conflicts or environmental and social justice causes, with many attacks targeting law‑enforcement, government, or individual public figures rather than aiming for high civilian body counts [3] [5] [6]; several recent high‑profile left‑aligned attacks were lone actors or small networks lacking the hierarchical structures of older movements, and lethal left‑wing events remained relatively few though high‑profile [5] [3].
4. Shared dynamics, lone actors and networked threats
Both sides show a mix of lone actors, small networks and occasional plotters with more organized intent, and researchers caution that personal grievances often intersect with ideological baggage—complicating neat labels—but data trends still indicate right‑wing adherents have been more likely to inflict mass fatalities while left‑wing actors have more often focused on symbolic or targeted violence against state actors [9] [2] [10]; scholars also note that left‑wing extremists often lack the resources, training and transnational support networks that have amplified other types of terrorist threats [5].
5. Politics, media framing and contested narratives
Political leaders and media outlets have at times amplified different portions of the dataset to support policy aims—some politicians emphasize recent left‑wing attacks to justify crackdowns on protest movements while others stress the historical predominance and lethality of right‑wing terrorism—prompting watchdogs and fact‑checks to urge careful reading of definitions and datasets when crafting policy responses [6] [4] [3]; independent analysis groups warn that spikes in attention to individual high‑profile incidents can distort perceptions about the underlying distribution of threats [1] [11].
Conclusion: what the evidence supports and where uncertainty remains
Across multiple studies and journalistic reports, the consistent finding is that ideologically motivated shootings since 2020 reflect divergent motive sets—white‑supremacist, anti‑government and misogynist drivers on the right versus partisan anti‑state and social‑justice or international‑solidarity drivers on the left—and that although left‑wing incidents have risen episodically, right‑wing violence remains the more frequent and deadlier phenomenon by most measures, while researchers urge caution because definitions, dataset inclusion rules and the political context shape public interpretation [1] [3] [2].