https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_of_Lead_(Italy)
In The Power of Nightmares, Adam Curtis talks about how opposing sides exploit the mutual vicious cycle of outrage. The common interest between extreme groups who otherwise demonize and hate each other, is that they both benefit from the cycle of outrage and the breakdown of society. Both fringes want to let things break down and roll the dice, for the chance they might come out on top.
We don't; domestic extremist violence for many years in the US has consistently been very one-sided, with the Right being the absolutely dominant source, especially for deadly violence against persons.
Are those the two "sides" you are referring to? If so, I fail to see how they are engaging in a "mutual vicious cycle of outrage".
You don’t see antifa hooligans wearing Clinton garb. You did see MAGA hats at Charlottesville.
This isn’t a both sides issue.
To them, Clinton is a dirty centrist.
This isn’t a both sides issue.
It's not even a both fringes issue, as there are multiple fringes that don't even like each other. It is a fringes issue, however.
https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/wha...
All of that stuff is bad, and bad for us.
According to https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_IdeologicalMotivationsO... there have been no deaths from left wing terrorism in the USA for nearly 40 years.
You can read the same information here: https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf
> Specifically, tables 1 and 2 show a description, date, location and number of victim fatalities for each far right [106] and radical Islamist [119] attack between September 12, 2001 and December 31, 2016. During this period, no persons in the United States were killed in attacks carried out by persons believed to be motivated by extremist environmental beliefs, extremist “animal liberation”beliefs, or extremist far left beliefs.
Depends on what is counted as far-left extremism. There were anti-white / anti-police attacks associated with BLM:
https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gt...
https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gt...
> he needed to bring destruction 'upon bad cops as well as good cops' because of what he saw as the justice system's failure to prosecute bad police officers who commit crimes
wanting society to hold criminal police officers accountable is a "extremist far left belief", regardless of this individual's deranged methodology.
What makes you think these were from far-left extremism? What groups or ideology did they profess to be a part of?
You don't need to be associated with a group to be an individual extremist deciding to advance a movement. The shooter's photographed doing a black power salute. The black power movement isn't right wing.
https://heavy.com/news/2016/07/micah-xavier-x-johnson-dallas...
While there may certainly be more extremists on the right the idea that someone on the left can't be an extremist, or that there are no leftist extremists, doesn't make much sense.
Well of course it doesn't, which is why nobody was saying that. There's been plenty of horrific deadly left wing violence historically, both in the US and other countries. It's just that in the last few decades and limited to the US, there has been little to no deadly left wing violence, a time period which has seen quite a lot of deadly right wing violence.
But also, yes, I think it's not unreasonable to expect that people might show more outrage for murders than for property damage, even if they disagree with both.
I never mentioned property damage. Antifa's violence isn't "property damage". This is the kind of thing I'm talking about: bad faith straw manning to justify ignoring violence by leftists.
The dataset that I mention above doesn't contain any references to antifa. This is probably because 'antifa' isn't a specific group, but an umbrella term for a number of groups, some of which are entirely nonviolent or target only property.
> This is the kind of thing I'm talking about: bad faith straw manning to justify ignoring violence by leftists.
This is pretty unfair. I'm not in a position to do anything about any particular act of violence, but there's a strong chance that if you suggest a concrete example to me I'll state that I disagree with it. For example, I don't believe that you should punch people you disagree with in the face, regardless of whether they are fascists or not.
You should not be surprised however, that people are more aware of violence resulting in fatalities and more vocal in their condemnation of it than other violence (even other violence that they also disagree with).
That's not a truthful statement, or even close.