Posted on 04/04/2019 5:31:27 AM PDT by SJackson
The March 15 terrorist attack in Christchurch, New Zealand, triggered a debate about the terrorist threat from the far right in Western democracies. Two competing narratives leave the public with mixed signals.
On the one hand, right-wing terrorism is often portrayed as marginal compared to Islamist terrorism. This is also reflected in terrorism research, which, since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, has mainly been preoccupied with Islamist terrorism. This one-sided focus on Islamist terrorism may have kept the public unaware of the fact that in most Western democracies, the number of deadly attacks motivated by far-right beliefs is considerably higher than those motivated by Islamism, including in the United States.
On the other hand, when the media do report about right-wing terrorism, typically in the aftermath of an attack, there is a tendency to always portray it as “on the rise.” However, if that were true, today’s levels of violence would be unprecedented, which is not necessarily the case. In fact, right-wing violence has by some measures declined from its peaks several years ago — although this trajectory may be changing.
How do we measure right-wing violence?
One reason behind the conflicting narratives of right-wing violence may be that displays of the threat level by leading mainstream media outlets rely on incomplete data drawn from data sets that suffer from critical shortcomings. Several issues must be resolved to present a reliable and valid assessment of the scale and development of right-wing terrorism and violence. First, we need to agree about how to distinguish right — wing attacks from other types of violence, such as apolitical crimes (e.g. armed robbery) committed by members of far right groups. Second, we need some kind of systematic measurement displaying reliable patterns of change over time
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
In a way that supports our preexisting conclusions.
And not one word about the Occupy violence, the Antifa violence and all the other left wing attacks.
It is Left wing terrorism along with the threat of Islam that is the threat....which continues to grow.
This article is based on a lie, that the Christchurch killer was “right wing”. He was pretty clearly an Eco-Fascist per his detailed manifesto.
“How do we measure right-wing violence?”
Mostly by making s*** up.
L
Nor is it a systemic problem in any country. The Christchurch cases gets a lot of media coverage because it fits the Left's false narrative of "Muslims as victims of racism" and because it is a freakishly rare "man bites dog" story.
Meanwhile, terrorist attacks BY Muslims occur around the world on a weekly basis and are mostly a footnote. These include recent attacks against Christian Churches in Egypt, the ISIS-inspired Church bombing in the Philippines, and the Dutch shooting all happened within weeks of Christchurch, but received far less media coverage.
Are cow farts right wing violence?
The answer is: Right-wing terrorism and unicorns.
The question is: What are two things that only exist in the minds of delusional Communist moonbats ?
Do they count a MAGA hat sighting as right-wing violence?
Right wing terrorism, what right wing terrorism, examples please, and make sure they were right (no pun intended) here in the good old US of A. Right wing terrorism my lily white backside.
You are not allowed to use examples from the Government right wing terrorist website Southern Poverty Law Center.
If this is right wing, show us his manifesto
Also, by limiting his scope to Western democracies, the author avoids the PRONOUNCED worldwide pattern of Islamic violence. I haven't read the full article but I doubt he says a word about this minor detail.
There is a problem with reporting "right-wing terrorism". Any crime, attack, proven false "hate crime " hoax are all massaged/molested to be assigned to be caused or driven by the "right wing extremists".
The problem with that is the "standard" for such (right wing terrorism) is no longer a standard or reliable guide to follow.
Reminds me of playing the game 'Battleship!' as a kid; if every time your opponent made a 'hit' on one of your ships, you moved the piece over and claimed 'miss!', eventually, the board is mapped out on one side (leaving no place to hide) and the other, remain ships with no acknowledged hits but that are hit nonetheless.
The ships are "terrorist attacks", the mapped board represents the application of logic to identify the attacks according to the shifting SJW "logic".
The side moving the ships to avoid being 'hit' by their own shifting rules, to avoid reality are left with false, unsupported data but those ships were each hit multiple times.
It’s so far right it’s left.
From what I have read, most of the ‘right wing’ terrorism was actually perpetrated by leftists and Democrat supporters against other leftists, once the ‘truth’ is out. But on initial reporting, they are identified as ‘right wing’.
If not for all the mis-attributed terrorism and violence committed by leftists, it would probably be zero.
JoMa
Right wing violence is the good guy with a gun stopping the bad guy with a gun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.