The right’s criticism of dangerous rhetoric is both shrewd and deeply hypocritical.
As the Republican Party gathered for their convention just days after Donald Trump was shot at during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania, they wasted no time in exploiting the situation. Their strategy became clear: they would turn the Democrats’ strongest argument against Trump—his rhetoric as a threat to democracy—into an accusation against the left, claiming that it was their words that incited violence. This political move, while shrewd, is deeply hypocritical, as it ignores the history of politically motivated violence from the right.
The Republican narrative is not new. Over the past several years, the right has either supported or downplayed acts of political violence. The January 6th Capitol riot, where pro-Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, was a violent act that stemmed directly from Trump’s rhetoric. Yet, now that Trump has been the victim of violence, Republicans are eager to claim that the left’s criticism of such rhetoric is what incites violence, not acknowledging the way their own dangerous language has contributed to the atmosphere of political unrest.
This approach is based on a cunning political calculation. By redirecting the blame for political violence, Republicans avoid reckoning with their own role in stoking the fire. They are attempting to shift the narrative, making it about the left’s supposed hypocrisy while sidestepping their own incendiary words that have fueled division and violence.
The hypocrisy is evident in the stark contrast between the Republicans’ words and their actions. For years, Trump and other prominent Republicans have used language that undermines democratic institutions and encourages violence. From calls to “fight” against perceived enemies to questioning the legitimacy of elections, their rhetoric has contributed to a growing climate of political aggression. Yet, in the aftermath of the assassination attempt on Trump, the party has repositioned itself as the defender of peace and civility.
By framing the left as the primary inciters of violence, Republicans are not only deflecting responsibility but also attempting to rewrite the narrative surrounding political discourse. This strategy relies on the assumption that voters will forget the history of their own rhetoric and violence. But as the country becomes increasingly divided, such claims are unlikely to resonate with those who have seen firsthand the consequences of inflammatory speech.
Democrats, caught off guard by this tactic, have been left scrambling to respond. The focus has shifted from addressing the causes of political violence to a counterargument about whose words are to blame. This creates a distorted conversation, where both sides accuse each other of inciting violence, but neither takes full responsibility for the toxic political environment that has developed.
As both parties continue to trade blame, the real issue remains obscured. Political violence, whether incited by the left or right, is a dangerous symptom of a wider problem: the degradation of American political discourse. Instead of finding common ground, both sides are retreating into their respective corners, amplifying division and making it harder to address the root causes of the violence that continues to destabilize the nation.
