The Left Continues To Support Violent Rhetoric - Where Is This All Leading?

The last 12 months have exposed the Left as the protagonist of violence, although today its main stenographers misinform their own audience and remain in denial.

Let's recall two assassination attempts on presidential candidate Donald Trump, Luigi Mangione's assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City in December 2024, the bullet that pierced the neck of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the assassination of two Israeli diplomats while the murderer chanted "Free Palestine!" in Washington, D.C. 

Let's also recall the violent trend against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. In one example on July 4, 2025, a dozen individuals dressed in black clothing and equipped with tactical gear attacked the Prairieland Detention Facility in Alvarado, Texas.  We also just witnessed a vehicle ramming attack on ICE vehicles this week and the refusal of the Chicago Police Department to help stop mob violence against ICE agents due to leftists politics.

Despite all of this and the warning that such behavior must stop, leftists continue to endorse Democratic nominee for Attorney General of Virginia, Jay, Jones who has been exposed for wishing death upon Republicans and their children in a vile manner:

The Democrat said that then-Speaker of the House of Delegates Todd Gilbert (R) should get "two bullets to the head." He also texted that if Republicans like Gilbert "die before me I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves." In a subsequent phone call with Coyner defending his texted comments, Jones reportedly said that if Gilbert's wife, Jennifer, had to watch her children be shot and killed then her Republican husband might revise his position on gun control laws. "I've told you this before. Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy," Jones said when pressed by Coyner. "I mean do I think Todd and Jennifer are evil? And that they're breeding little fascists? Yes."

Jones is also under fire for another conversation in which he suggested that supposed systemic racism and brutality among police departments might be cured if more police officers were killed in the line of duty. 

The events I've mentioned reveal a terrible truth: that the extremist charge isn't found in dark corners of the leftist base, but rather constitutes the very foundation of leftist beliefs.

A YouGov survey conducted immediately after the fatal shooting of Kirk asked if "it is ever justified for citizens to resort to violence in order to achieve political goals." The results showed that the more liberal respondents were, the more likely they were to say violence can sometimes be justified.

A quarter of respondents who identified as "very liberal" said violence can sometimes be justified to achieve political goals, along with 17% of those who identified as "liberal," 9% of moderates, 6% of those who said they're "conservative" and 3% of those who identified as "very conservative."

Twenty-six percent of liberals under 45 years old, compared with 12% of liberals 45 and older, said political violence can sometimes be justified; 12% of moderates under 45 years old, compared with 6% of moderates 45 and over, said it's sometimes justified; and 7% of younger conservatives, compared with 4% of older conservatives, said it's sometimes justified.

At the same time, the Democratic elite, including the mainstream media and several politicians, seem to justify political violence. Examples include Kamala Harris promoting donations to bail violent protesters during the 2020 "Summer of Love" and Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) repeating falsehoods about Kirk's character.

The first step to curbing the problem isn't creating false equivalencies by saying it's a "problem on both sides," because while there may be violence from the other political spectrum, it's proportionally incomparable right now.

The first step to curbing political violence isn't shouting to the winds about everyone "turning down the heat." It's the Democratic establishment that has unfairly labeled its political opposition as "fascists." And that label is the key to the structure of permissiveness that justifies violence against conservatives. If "fascism" (defeated militarily, politically, and culturally in World War II, that is) is the representation of Satan for a secular society, then if someone is a "fascist," ending their life would be justified.

A tentative acceptance of the problem has begun to make its way into media outlets across the left-wing political spectrum. The Atlantic magazine acknowledged that left-wing terrorism has increased since 2016, and that 2025 marks a milestone in that regard.

But to change course, Democratic leaders, strategists, and propagandists (like the addict mired in his own justifications) must accept that they are politically sick, but sick nonetheless. They must commit to shifting their rhetoric away from the constant inflammatory adjectives from platforms like California Governor Gavin Newsom's (D).

The response from the Right has been exemplary: memorials, mass prayers, a revival of faith.

In response to those who celebrated silencing a man like Kirk who promoted dialogue, conservatives promoted more debate, although the Left continues to react with cancellations and coercion.

YouTuber Steven Crowder recently resumed his debates on college campuses under the slogan "Change My Mind." It was precisely this format that inspired Kirk for his viral "Prove Me Wrong" videos. However, as a sign of the times, Crowder had to wear a bulletproof vest and hire private security to hold the event. 

The Left has a problem. It must acknowledge the violence that is overwhelmingly coming from its ranks today and call on its members to focus on dialogue, not bullets or blows. Otherwise, all the hours, and risks invested by conservatives in debating will be in vain, because there will be no one sitting on the other side of the table.

Originally published at The Washington Stand