The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University has ignited a firestorm of political rhetoric, with some on the radical Left openly endorsing or justifying violence. While these voices, such as a New Hampshire man's pipe bomb threats, an Oberlin student's Mao-inspired call for "political assassinations," and a Pennsylvania tax collector's provocative post, are extreme, the critical question is: How many on the radical Left share such views? Assuming it's "just a few" would be reckless, especially given the 2020 riots, where a small but destructive minority caused billions in damages. Drawing from recent polls, activist estimates, social media trends, and historical parallels, this post explores the potential scope of radical Leftist tolerance for violence, its societal impact, and why underestimating it risks catastrophe.
Recent polls reveal a troubling openness to political violence among a subset of Left-leaning Americans, particularly after Kirk's killing. A YouGov survey from September 10, 2025, found 72% of Americans say political violence is "never justified," but 11% believe it "can be," with liberals and younger respondents more likely to agree. A Reuters/Ipsos poll on September 16 showed 63% of Americans blame harsh rhetoric for rising violence, with 60% of Democrats pointing to the right and 69% of Republicans to the Left, highlighting polarised perceptions. More concerning, a Morning Consult poll indicated 28% of Democrats (vs. 19% of Republicans) see violence as "sometimes justified" post-Kirk, while RealClearPolling noted 81% of Republicans vs. 72% of Democrats reject it outright. A USA Today/YouGov poll flagged 59% of Americans viewing political violence as a "very big problem."
With Democrats comprising ~30-35% of the electorate (80-90 million adults), a 10-20% subset translates to 8-18 million potentially sympathetic to violence under certain conditions. While not "millions" actively plotting, as some claim, this suggests a broader undercurrent than isolated cases imply, especially since social desirability bias may suppress true numbers.
Defining the "radical Left" is complex; it spans Antifa, far-Left academics, and online militants, but estimates provide clarity. The 2025 DHS Homeland Threat Assessment flags Left-wing domestic violent extremists (DVEs) as a growing concern. A September 18 analysis noted Left-wing incidents (e.g., Antifa assaults) have risen since 2020. A Brookings survey from the 2025 People's March estimated 5-10% of progressive activists (~1-2 million, based on BLM's 2020 peak of 1.5 million) see violence as sometimes necessary. Harvard's 2025 Youth Poll found 15% of liberal 18-29-year-olds support "direct action," including violence, up from 8% in 2020. CSIS data shows a 20% annual rise in far-Left incidents since 2020, while a September 13 report estimated hundreds of thousands of active radicals, with millions of online sympathisers.
These aren't theoretical; they show up in protests and online echo chambers, where ideas like Maoist suppression gain traction, as seen in the Oberlin case. Experts warn that economic discontent or political crackdowns could swell these numbers.
The 2020 BLM protests illustrate how a small radical faction can wreak havoc. Over 10,000 demonstrations occurred, with 15-26 million participants, but 93-97% were peaceful. The violent 2-3%, often Antifa or opportunists, caused $1-2 billion in insured damages, 2,000+ police injuries, and 25 deaths. MCCA reported 574 violent riots, with 300+ federal charges for arson and assault. Peak daily participation hit 500,000-1 million, but radical groups (e.g., Antifa's 10,000-20,000 members) drove the chaos, looting businesses and clashing with police. Total damages likely exceeded $2 billion.
This dynamic persists post-Kirk: A minority justifies violence, but the fallout ripples widely, amplified by social media.
Since September 10, X posts reveal a spike in radical Leftist rhetoric. Searches for "political violence" and "assassination" with "left OR democrat OR antifa" show posts accusing the Left of normalising bloodshed, others decrying Right-wing retribution, and some radicals openly praising Kirk's death. The volume suggests thousands actively engage in or sympathise with violent rhetoric, potentially mobilising larger networks.
Gun ownership, 48% among Republicans vs. 20% among Democrats, favours the Right, limiting the Left's capacity for armed uprising. But 2020 showed radicals don't need guns to disrupt; protests and riots suffice. Kirk's death, Antifa's terrorist designation, and media crackdowns have escalated tensions, with posts linking the Left to an "open embrace of violence." Underestimating a radical minority, potentially hundreds of thousands active, millions sympathetic, risks repeating 2020's chaos.
Dangerous times are ahead, and the US disease will spread across the West, to Australia too.
https://michaeltsnyder.substack.com/p/america-is-reaching-a-boiling-point