Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Is it true that the right has committed more violent acts than the left
Executive Summary
The claim that “the right has committed more violent acts than the left” cannot be answered with a single blanket statement because recent analyses reach conflicting conclusions and emphasize different measures — frequency, lethality, and trends — producing divergent answers depending on the metric and time window examined. Some reporting and datasets through late 2025 indicate that right-wing violence historically caused more deaths and was more frequent, while new studies and incident tallies from 2025 show a surge in left-wing attacks that, in some counts, outnumber right-wing incidents for the first time in decades [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Big Picture: Contradictory Findings, Same Question — Who’s More Violent?
Analysts disagree because they measure different outcomes: incident counts, fatalities, and trends over time. Multiple pieces from September 2025 frame the debate sharply: one set of reporting and datasets continues to show that right-wing extremism has been more frequent and deadlier since 2001, attributing roughly 75–80% of domestic terrorism deaths to the right [1]. Countervailing research from the Center for Strategic and International Studies and related reporting shows that 2025 saw a rise in left-wing attacks such that, by incident count, left-wing actions outnumbered far-right attacks for the first time in about 30 years [2] [3]. Both positions lean on valid but different metrics.
2. Why “deaths” and “incidents” Tell Different Stories
Lethality and frequency diverge: studies cited in September 2025 report that right-wing attacks have killed far more people over the past decades, for example 112 deaths attributed to right-wing actors versus 13 from left-wing actors in a recent decade-long comparison [4]. At the same time, other trackers and academic projects report a recent uptick in the number of left-wing incidents, shifting short-term incident tallies even while overall lethality historically remains higher for right-wing violence [2] [3]. The methodological choice — whether to prioritize lives lost or number of attacks — shapes the conclusion.
3. Recent Surge in Left-Wing Incidents: What the 2025 Data Shows
Several September 2025 analyses highlight a noticeable jump in left-wing political violence, citing examples such as attacks at enforcement facilities and high-profile assassinations that drove media attention and dataset spikes [2] [4]. These sources present the first year since the early 1990s in which left-wing incidents exceeded far-right incidents by count, a statistically notable shift for short-term trend analysis [3]. However, these reports also underline that historical context still favors higher cumulative lethality from right-wing actors, complicating any simple “more violent” verdict.
4. Continued Pattern: Right-Wing Groups and Lethality Remain Central
Other contemporary coverage and datasets reaffirm that right-wing extremist violence remains the more lethal and persistent threat across longer windows, pointing to arrest records, prosecutions, and terrorist plots tied to right-wing groups and cells in multiple countries and years [5] [1]. Reporting on prosecutions in Germany and comparative U.S. analyses emphasize that right-wing plots have produced large-scale fatalities and have been a dominant source of domestic terrorism deaths since 2001, an important baseline for interpretation [5] [1].
5. Sources, Agendas, and What They Emphasize
The reports and studies come from mixed actors with different missions: advocacy groups, academic centers, and mainstream outlets. For instance, a Family Research Council report focused on church attacks frames a rise in anti-Christian incidents and may imply partisan attribution without definitive perp data [6]. Academic theses and think-tank research concentrate on pathways and statistical patterns, offering nuanced methods but different emphases [7] [4]. Each source’s priorities shape which metric — frequency, lethality, or recent trend — is spotlighted, and readers should weigh those emphases.
6. Measurement Matters: Definitions, Time Frames, and Attribution
Disagreement often traces to how researchers define “political violence,” who counts as “left” or “right,” and what time window they use. Some datasets include property damage, threats, and non-lethal attacks; others count only homicides or designated terrorist incidents. Attribution challenges — including lack of claimed responsibility or mixed motives — further muddy counts [8] [7]. Without standardization, apples-to-apples comparison is impossible, which explains why reputable sources can reach different conclusions simultaneously.
7. Bottom Line: A Qualified Answer and What to Watch Next
A defensible summary is: historically and by fatalities, right-wing actors have been more deadly, but 2025 saw a measurable rise in left-wing incidents that, by some incident-count metrics, outpaced far-right attacks for the first time in decades [1] [2] [3] [4]. Policymakers and the public should therefore track both short-term incident trends and long-term lethality statistics, scrutinize definitions and data sources, and remain alert to how partisan framings from advocacy groups can influence interpretation [6] [7].