Do right wing terrorists really kill more than Muslims?

>>130814352
No, and they never have.

>>130814352
Question doesn't make sense as Muslim terrorists are right wing.

>>130814352
Define "right wing terrorist"

>>130814459
>>130814479
Where are the statistics to prove it?
>>130814554
https://theintercept.com/2017/05/31/the-numbers-dont-lie-white-far-right-terrorists-pose-a-clear-danger-to-us-all/

I don't agree with it, someone is spouting this shit. I saw a image on /pol/ that showed terror attacks by ideology but I can't find it online, or anything similar.

>>130814352
So to start off I assume you are talking about this: https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf

Hmm doesn't look good does it? Unless of course we read it thuroughly that is. Start date is September 12, 2001 (huh convienient huh?)

If you go to the link, the total number of deaths due to right wing extremism is 106, while the total number of deaths due to Islamic extremism is 119, so it's interesting to see how selective people can be when presenting facts.

Reading more of the report, I was struck by the criteria given for right wing and left wing extremism respectively, not to mention the distinct lack of the latter. It lists only two criteria for left wing extremism in a footnote on page one as involving extreme views on animal rights and environmentalism. It unsurprisingly found no fatalities due to it.

But then look at all the criteria for right wing extremism:
• Fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation); • Anti-global; • Suspicious of centralized federal authority; • Reverent of individual liberty (especially right to own guns; be free of taxes); • Belief in conspiracy theories that involve a grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty; • Belief that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent; and • Belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in or supporting the need for paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism.
How, exactly, are all of these especially "right wing?" None of them are further defined. And let's consider:
• Leftists can be nationalists (including of the extreme kind; just read history).

(1/2)

>>130814352
>>130814731
so do you guys at shareblue get paid for this, or do you just do it for fun?

>>130814889
• Leftists can be anti-global, but this is very vague. What is a universal or international orientation? I notice, too, that both Trump supporters and Bernie supporters loathe multinational corporate corruption.
• Leftists can be suspicious of centralized federal authority. Ever read Chomsky or heard of libertarian socialists or any other kind of left wing anarchist?
• Leftists can and do believe in conspiracy theories. Here's an article covering some recent ones, from a leftist magazine no less: https://newrepublic.com/article/142977/new-paranoia-trump-election-turns-democrats-conspiracy-theorists
• The line about being "reverent of individual liberty" is just bizarre. How does that lead to murder? That's like saying being reverent of flags leads to flag burning.
• Leftists believe that their personal and/or national way of life is under attack. Just read any major newspaper or go back and watch any of the coverage of the last election. You'd think Trump ought to be revving up those gas chambers for the Muslims and Mexicans by now....
• Leftists do believe in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in or supporting the need for paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism. Antifa anyone?
So, again, I ask, what is a right wing extremist? Someone who believes in the racial superiority of the white race? But what about the progressivist eugenicists at the turn of the nineteenth century?
I don't mind admitting that there is right wing extremism and condemning it if someone can adequately define what it is and show me examples of it. Meanwhile, I'm getting tired of all the hand-wringing and double standards from leftists. They never have to own up for crimes committed in their ideology's name, but conservatives are constantly saddled with every last nutbag neo-Nazi loon that can be scraped from the bottom of the American barrel. (2/2)

>>130814352
if you just compare locally... maybe. If you compare the two groups on a world scale, the Muslims are clearly the bigger threat.

Now if you were to compare left wing radicals with right wing radicals, locally, the left wingers would be the more violent.

This meme that "right wing white people are the biggest threat to mankind" is false on multiple levels.

>>130814966
>>130814889
Any data/charts showing a breakdown of motivations by ideology?

>>130814731
Because statistic about islamic terror

a) start at a convenient cutoff date (namely September 11th 2001) as >>130814889 already pointed out
b) touch up or downright hide facts from the public (see Rotherham for the prime example of this).

Add the fact that stuff such as "hate speech" on Twatter and the like all get put into the """right wing terror""" statistics (which happened in Germany, for example), and suddenly you've got real peaceful, innocent muslims on one side, and evil, racist right wing terrorists on the other.