Podcast Summary: "The Trump administration says left-wing terrorism in the US is on the rise. Is it?"

Podcast: Consider This from NPR
Host: Ailsa Chang
Air Date: October 22, 2025

Overview

This episode examines claims by the Trump administration that left-wing terrorism is rising in the United States, particularly in the wake of the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk. NPR explores the evidence behind these claims, highlights the complexities of categorizing political violence, and features experts who discuss whether there is a real shift in the threat landscape. The episode digs into recent data, the challenges in drawing firm conclusions, and the ways in which political violence is evolving in the U.S.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Presidential Rhetoric Following Charlie Kirk's Assassination

[00:00–01:16]

• President Trump, reacting to Charlie Kirk's assassination, condemns what he labels as "radical left" violence.
• Trump attributes an ongoing pattern of political violence—including attacks against ICE, a healthcare executive's killing, and the shooting of Steve Scalise—to left-wing extremism:
  • “Those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world's worst mass murderers… This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing...” — Donald Trump [00:27]
• He moves to designate Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization for the first time in US history.

2. Is Left-Wing Political Violence Really Increasing?

[01:40–03:26]

• Reporter Odette Youssef points out the increasing complexity and chaos of motivations for violence, making it difficult to categorize events purely by ideology:
  • “Ideologies are becoming so chaotic, so complex, and because motivation towards violence appears to be a more important factor these days... than actually ideology.” — Odette Youssef [01:40]
• She notes historical context: Over prior years, right-wing terrorism was both more frequent and deadlier than left-wing terrorism.

3. Recent Data: Are Trends Shifting?

[03:26–06:06]

• Data from Daniel Byman (CSIS) suggests an uptick in left-wing terrorist activity in the first half of 2025, overtaking right-wing activity for the first time in 30 years.
  • However, only five far-left incidents were identified.
• Amy Kuder (Institute for Countering Digital Extremism) cautions that this is a very small dataset:
  • “Five is a really low case number to try to make any kinds of inference from and try to say we’re having an increase in any kind of problem.” — Amy Kuder [06:06]
• Any rise looks dramatic when the baseline is so low.

4. Disputes Over Defining and Counting Incidents

[06:46–08:00]

• Determining whether an incident "counts" as left-wing terrorism is subjective:
  • Were Tesla arson attacks terrorism or sabotage? Should pre-empted attacks or acts with ambiguous motives be included?
• Example of methodological issues: Some attacks (e.g., firebombings at Tesla infrastructure) might not be counted, while others (e.g., arson of NYPD squad cars) are, depending on the study.
  • “There are a host of subjective calls when it comes to analyzing domestic terrorism. How destructive was the crime? Did people die? Was that by intent? … What was the perpetrator’s politics or ideology? Did that motivate the violence?” — Narrator/Reporter [07:01]

5. The Blurring Lines: Political Violence Beyond Left and Right

[08:00–09:56]

• Motives for violence are frequently unclear; many incidents lie outside traditional ideological frames.
• Jacob Ware (Council on Foreign Relations) argues that terrorism is becoming more personal and targeted:
  • “Terrorism is getting more personal...” — Jacob Ware [09:14]
• Recent incidents, such as killings of a healthcare CEO and a Minnesota lawmaker, defy classic "mass casualty" forms of terrorism and often lack clear political statements or manifestos.

6. Limitation of Current Data and Policy Implications

[09:56–10:42]

• Many incidents do not have publicly available perpetrator motivations or ideological statements, making classification as "terrorism" difficult.
  • “We really need to get statements or justifications, motivations from perpetrators, and I don’t think we have that in the Charlie Kirk assassination or the Minnesota assassination... they're clearly assassins, but I just don't think we have the information yet that would allow us to code them as terrorists.” — Odette Youssef [09:56]
• Experts warn that in the current political climate, data may have limited effect on policy directions as partisanship drives rhetoric and action.

Notable Quotes and Moments

• On presidential framing:
  “This is not a right wing problem. This is a left [wing problem].” — Donald Trump, referencing earlier debates [04:10]

• On interpretation of limited data:
  “Compared to historical data, almost any increase in left wing violence is going to look like a big jump.” — Amy Kuder [06:39]

• On the challenge of attribution:
  “There are a host of subjective calls when it comes to analyzing domestic terrorism… How much fear did the act create? To what extent did mental health issues factor into the attack?” — Narrator/Reporter [07:01]

• On evolving forms of violence:
  “Historically, domestic terrorists in the US have sought a large body count… in recent cases, perpetrators or suspects haven’t done that even in situations where they could have killed more people.” — Jacob Ware [09:17]

Important Timestamps

• [00:00–01:16]: Trump administration's immediate reaction to Charlie Kirk's assassination, blaming the left and designating Antifa as a terrorist organization.
• [03:26–04:02]: Context setting — Republicans using recent attacks to amplify concerns about left-wing violence.
• [05:03–06:14]: Daniel Byman and Amy Kuder on the difficulties and limits of current terrorism data.
• [06:46–08:00]: Disputes over inclusion/exclusion of incidents as terrorism in studies.
• [09:14–09:56]: Jacob Ware: Contemporary political violence is more personal, increasingly difficult to classify.
• [09:56–10:42]: Lack of clear perpetrator motivation complicates labeling incidents as terrorism; politics may override data in shaping policy.

Summary Conclusion

The episode underscores the complexity in assessing claims of rising left-wing terrorism in the US. While recent data suggest a relative uptick in left-wing incidents, the absolute numbers remain very small, and the interpretation is fraught with methodological challenges. Experts caution against drawing strong conclusions from limited, ambiguous data and emphasize the changing nature of political violence—motivations are harder to pin down, and traditional ideological binaries are often inadequate. As the Trump administration focuses on left-wing violence, the politicization of such trends appears likely to continue, regardless of what the evolving data actually show.