Democrats Must Face Their Violence Problem

If you are to believe our mainstream media at this moment, the chief threat to Americans comes from the right – specifically from nebulous “white nationalist” hate groups. But the reality is that America’s problem with political violence is a problem of the left and the Democratic Party that claims that side of the political aisle. It is thus the Democratic Party’s responsibility to clearly condemn this behavior and disassociate from those promoting and committing it. Will they?  

The early evidence is not good. In the wake of the most recent act of brutal violence, the murder of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim – two young Israeli Embassy aides who were on the verge of getting engaged – we were treated to a whole series of attempts to change the subject, make the action seem not quite as bad, or even justify it.

Those attempting to change the subject include the egregious Minnesota Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar, who was asked by reporters if she condemned the murder. Her response? “I’m gonna go now.”

NBC News, attempting to be slightly less ridiculous, chose to publish a story on Thursday titled “Hate groups in the U.S. decline, but their influence grows, report shows.” The article is not really journalism but instead the utterly incurious summary of a Southern Poverty Law Center report that spins the decrease in “hate and extremist groups” as due to “a lesser urgency to organize because their beliefs have infiltrated politics, education and society in general.”  

Hate and extremism in government and society? Well, the SPLC/NBC version of hate and extremism is “pushing for bans on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, book bans and protests of drag story hours.”

That’s right – according to the media, if you don’t want anti-white and anti-Asian discrimination, pornography in grade schools, or men in dresses and bizarre make-up reading strange stories to your kids, you are a violent extremist.

Appended to the regurgitation of the SPLC report is the supposed proof in the pudding of “right-wing violence”: the story of a Japanese American Vietnam veteran and professor in Montebello, California, who was struck by a car on his bike after hearing someone yell a racial slur from the car.

One doesn’t have to think the 70-something professor is a Jussie Smollett to wonder why we are supposed to think the assailant was a denizen of “MAGA Country” or even white. None of the articles this author could find indicates that the professor saw the person in the car, and there is no reason to believe the assailant was not black or Hispanic. In short, NBC’s example is pretty weak.

Other media/Democrat figures attempted to soften the story of the two murdered young Israelis, either by playing the “we’ll never know the motive” card, depicting the alleged murderer Elias Gonzalez in sympathetic terms, or by trying to portray his motivations as somehow different from the left-wing Palestinian protesters who have been harassing Jews and those who stand with them since October 7, 2023.

The New York Times reported that “FBI Seeks Motive After 2 Israeli Embassy Aides Are Murdered” right above material indicating that the assailant shouted “Free Palestine” as they arrested him. In fact, there is a video of him yelling it available. Gee—we’re all stumped.

Left-wing podcaster Hasan Piker said that he could understand why some people on his side of the aisle thought the murder was a “false flag,” but offered that he thought the perpetrator “was genuine in with his actions.” A “genuine” murderer? One tries to imagine a right-wing killer being treated in this fashion.

And a CNN interviewer worried more about how the murder would cast a bad light on the supposedly “good” pro-Hamas protesters. Her guest, who had been on the scene, had to explain to her that the protesters who shout “Free Palestine” and call for “intifada” are “giving permission” for such acts of violence.

It’s absurd to deny it. The anti-Israel protester behavior has been atrocious. We’ve heard all about Ivy League examples, but there are plenty more. A new lawsuit against George Washington University alleges that the university allowed “pervasive and severe antisemitic harassment” on campus that included “physical assaults, vandalism, and verbal harassment, with university administrators allegedly turning a blind eye.”

To “globalize the intifada,” as signs at the protests say, means violent action against Jews around the world—and ultimately against the U.S. To the Marxian-tinged Islamic radicals in the Middle East, Israel has always been the little Satan to the American Great Satan.

Rodriguez, the shooter, had an email connected to an eBay account selling 9/11-themed Muslim prayer rugs and, according to a Washington Examiner report, has been “involved with the PSL, a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist group that advocates overthrowing capitalism and implementing socialism.” The Washington Free Beacon added to that picture with a report on other far-left groups Rodriguez cooperated with, some of which are tightly connected to the Chinese Communist Party.

What we have seen in 2025 is a series of violent acts—from destruction and vandalism of Teslas to the fatal shooting of a United Healthcare executive to this brutal murder of two young people who were planning for marriage—and the response of the Democrats is too little and too late.

After pressure, Rep. Omar finally put out a statement that managed to skirt around condemning the radicals: “I am appalled by the deadly shooting at the Capital Jewish Museum last night. Holding the victims, their families, and loved ones in my thoughts and prayers. Violence should have no place in our country.”

Democrats can and must do better than this bland resort to lamenting generic “violence.” In the case of the murder of Lischinsky and Milgrim, as in the case of the United Healthcare executive, the left doesn’t even seem to be interested in their usual claims about gun control.

As the French poet Charles Péguy once observed, “It will never be known what acts of cowardice have been committed for fear of not looking sufficiently progressive.” With today’s Democrats, we know that those acts are far too many. David P. Deavel teaches at the University of St. Thomas in Houston. A past Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute, he is a Senior Contributor at The Imaginative Conservative. Follow him on X (Twitter) @davidpdeavel.