FIFY: The Cato Study Redone

Matt Margolis did an excellent breakdown of that study recently, in case you are unfamiliar.

The Problem With Cato’s Study

The title of the Cato study claims to measure political violence, but instead it measures only political murders — and even then, the categories were cooked. Anarchists like Timothy McVeigh were shoved into the “right-wing” bucket. Because of the "murder" limitation, entire swaths of left-coded violence, like the George Floyd riots, were left out, making it appear that the left hardly engaged in political violence. For that matter, at no point did they clearly define what made an incident “right” or “left.”

That’s like writing a study on diet trends and declaring Americans healthier than ever because pizza sauce and French fries count as vegetables — while leaving out mushrooms, corn, and beans — then declaring in the title "Americans Are in Fact Healthy". Words and definitions matter. Without them, statistics become verbal games, and at worst propaganda.

So let’s fix it.

Clear Definitions (up front, where they belong)

Honest studies start by defining critical terminology. This ensures there are guide rails to make questions about proper data categorization consistent and simple. It also makes clear to the reader what you mean; unfortunately, we live in a time when words are muddled, often deliberately, for political reasons.

And just so it's clear, I'm not making any judgments here about whether anyone is right or wrong. I'm just trying to get the facts, ma'am. In real life, of course, I have very pointed opinions!

• Right-Wing Extremist Expression: violence to preserve or restore perceived hierarchy, tradition, or order (white supremacy, anti-abortion terror, antisemitic attacks). In practice, this usually means lone actors — radicalized individuals who take matters into their own hands.
• Left-Wing Extremist Expression: violence to dismantle or overturn hierarchy, order, or law (Antifa riots, Floyd riots, eco-terrorism). In practice, this usually means mobs — groups that gather and justify collective lawlessness.
• Other: violence not right or left — Islamist jihadism, anarchist/nihilist terrorism, apocalyptic cults, lone lunatics.
• Political murders = unlawful killings tied to ideology.
• Political violence = riots, arson, assaults, unrest — including murder when it occurs.
• Attempted murders/assassinations = plots or attacks targeting political figures that failed to kill but still show intent.

Dataset 1: Political Murders (2000–2025)

Total murders: Right ≈ 65, Left ≈ 30, Other ≈ 90.

Dataset 2: Political Violence (2000–2025)

Total Deaths: Right ≈ 1, Left ≈ 30+, Other ≈ 0.

Dataset 3: Attempted Political Murders & Assassinations (Failed or Foiled)

Left-Wing Attempts

• 2017 — Congressional Baseball Practice (James Hodgkinson) — Steve Scalise critically injured, others wounded.
• 2017 — Rand Paul assault — severe injuries, survived.
• 2022 — Brett Kavanaugh attempt — armed assailant foiled.
• 2025 — Donald Trump, Butler PA rally — grazed by bullet, survived.
• 2025 — Donald Trump, Florida golf course — foiled attempt.
• 2025 — Melissa Hortman / John Hoffman shootings — Hortman and husband murdered, Hoffman and wife wounded; politically motivated assassin.

Right-Wing Attempts

• None recorded 2000–2025 (though successful murders are in Dataset 1).

Outliers (Not in Table, But Worthy of Mention)

• 1992 LA Riots: 63 killed, over 2,000 injured, ~$1 billion damage. Left-wing.
• 9/11 Islamist Attacks: 2,977 killed. Neither right nor left, but the single largest extremist attack in U.S. history.

Political Violence Beyond Blood: Silencing Speech

Political violence doesn’t always come with a body count. Sometimes it comes as mobs who shut down speech through intimidation, fire alarms, or outright assault. If riots are the left’s crowd problem, then campus disruptions are the most visible example of how that crowd turns its fury against words. The following is a small sampling of some of the most egregious instances in this century.

Dataset 4: Speaker Shutdowns (2000–2025)

Left-Wing Disruptions (dominant)

• 2007 — Columbia University: Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist rushed off stage by violent protesters.
• 2014 — Brown University: NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly shouted down, speech canceled.
• 2017 — UC Berkeley: Milo Yiannopoulos event canceled after riots; fires set, $100k+ damages.
• 2017 — Middlebury College: Charles Murray’s lecture disrupted; professor Allison Stanger assaulted, suffered concussion.
• 2017 — Claremont McKenna College: Heather Mac Donald lecture canceled after mobs blocked entrances.
• 2019 — Portland State University: Andy Ngo event violently disrupted; threats and assaults forced shutdown.
• 2022 — Yale Law School: Kristen Waggoner (Alliance Defending Freedom) shouted down by student mob, event effectively halted.
• 2023 — Stanford Law School: Judge Kyle Duncan heckled by students and faculty, could not deliver prepared lecture.
• 2024 — UC Davis: Turning Point USA event canceled mid-speech due to fire alarm and mob pressure.

Right-Wing Disruptions (rare to nonexistent)

• A handful of isolated cases (drag queen story hours, sex-ed programs) where events were canceled due to protests or petitions. Documented assaults or large-scale mob shutdowns of left-wing speakers by right-wing groups are virtually nonexistent.

The left has repeatedly used mobs to silence right-coded speakers, especially at universities. The right almost never responds in kind. The asymmetry is as glaring here as it is in the murder and riot datasets: one side normalizes intimidation, the other side recoils from it.

What the Numbers Really Say

When you count honestly, three different patterns emerge:

• The left has a serious problem with generalized mob violence. Riots, arson, “autonomous zones.” These episodes repeat, kill dozens, injure thousands, and cause billions in damage. Leaders and cultural figures on the left often excuse or romanticize them.
• The right has a serious — though smaller — problem with lone extremist actors. White supremacist shooters, antisemitic killers, replacement-theory fanatics. They are fewer, but their attacks are spectacular, identity-driven, and stain the whole movement by association. Leaders and cultural figures on the right almost universally condemn them.
• The “other” category is significant and deadly — jihadist terror, anarchist plots, and now the Hortman/Hoffman shootings. These don’t fit left or right, but they prove how shallow it is to measure only “right vs. left.”

The Honest Conclusion

The United States does not face one problem of “political violence.” It faces two different problems on the left and right, and a third outside both.

• For the left, the problem is mob justice — crowds that burn, loot, and kill under the banner of “justice.”
• For the right, the problem is radicalized lone actors — individuals who decide they are judge, jury, and executioner.
• For the “other,” the problem is ideologues outside the left-right axis — jihadists, anarchists, or apocalyptic killers like the man who murdered Melissa Hortman and her husband.

Both left and right problems are serious, but they are not the same. Pretending only one side has a problem — as the Cato study does — is the biggest lie of all.