Fact check: How many fatalities have been attributed to far-right and far-left extremist attacks in the US since 2020?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses provided do not offer a direct answer to the question of how many fatalities have been attributed to far-right and far-left extremist attacks in the US since 2020 ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}. However, they do provide insight into the broader trend of extremist violence in the United States. Right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for the majority of ideologically motivated deaths in the US, with studies suggesting that it accounts for approximately 75% to 80% of domestic terrorism deaths since 2001 ^[3]. In contrast, left-wing extremist incidents have made up about 10% to 15% of incidents and less than 5% of fatalities ^[3]. The CSIS brief states that right-wing attacks and plots accounted for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994, with 57% of all attacks and plots during this period, compared to 25% committed by left-wing terrorists ^[2].

• The removed DOJ study found that far-right extremists were responsible for 227 events resulting in over 520 lives lost since 1990, while far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives in the same period ^[1].
• The threat of violence from violent extremists radicalized in the United States will remain high but largely unchanged in 2024, with domestic violent extremists (DVEs) having conducted three fatal attacks in the Homeland resulting in 21 deaths since January 2022 ^[2].
• The production, trafficking, and sale of illegal drugs by transnational and domestic criminal actors probably pose the most lethal and persistent threat to communities in the United States ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

A key piece of missing context is the lack of specific data on fatalities attributed to far-right and far-left extremist attacks in the US since 2020 ^{[3] [2] [4] [5] [6]}. The analyses provided primarily focus on the broader trends of extremist violence in the US, with some sources offering data on the number of incidents and fatalities since 1990 or 2001, but not specifically since 2020. Alternative viewpoints may include the perspective that the threat of extremist violence is evolving and may be influenced by various factors, such as social and economic conditions, political discourse, and the availability of firearms ^{[2] [3]}. Additionally, some sources may argue that the focus on right-wing and left-wing extremism overlooks the threat posed by other forms of extremism, such as jihadist extremism or single-issue extremism ^[4].

• The sources provided do not offer a comprehensive analysis of the root causes of extremist violence or the effectiveness of counter-extremism strategies ^{[1] [2] [3]}.
• The role of social media and online platforms in facilitating extremist radicalization and recruitment is not explicitly addressed in the analyses ^{[3] [2] [4]}.
• The impact of extremist violence on specific communities, such as minority groups or law enforcement, is not thoroughly examined in the sources provided ^{[5] [2] [6]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be subject to bias due to the lack of specific data on fatalities attributed to far-right and far-left extremist attacks in the US since 2020 ^{[3] [2] [4] [5] [6]}. This lack of data may lead to misinformed or exaggerated claims about the relative threat posed by different forms of extremism. Additionally, the focus on right-wing and left-wing extremism may overlook the threat posed by other forms of extremism, potentially creating a biased narrative ^[4]. The sources provided may also be influenced by political or ideological agendas, which could impact the accuracy and objectivity of the analyses ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

• The removed DOJ study and the CSIS brief may be subject to political influence or bias, which could affect the validity of their findings ^{[1] [2]}.
• The sources provided may overlook the complexity of extremist violence, reducing it to simplistic narratives or ideologies ^{[3] [2] [4]}.
• The **lack of transparency and