The hidden costs of political violence

Even the threat of violence may be silencing women, people of color, and Trump's Republican critics

While there’s been a considerable rise in violent rhetoric and threats, American politics is at least not rife with violence on a regular basis. Despite the attempt on Trump’s life last summer, the climate of political assassinations that we saw from the 1960s through the early 1980s has fortunately not returned. But even the threat of violence can have deleterious effects on politics, mostly serving to silence some voices while allowing others to thrive.

This country has a long history of political violence. Those who described the violence of January 6, 2021, as un-American or unprecedented were being extremely charitable. The country was born in revolution and has had several different strains of political violence throughout its history. January 6th was the heir of a long line of actions — including efforts to prevent Lincoln’s inauguration in 1861, to overthrow the biracial government of Wilmington, North Carolina in 1898, to destroy the Black business district of Tulsa in 1921, to resist the removal of Confederate statue in Charlottesville in 2017, and more — in which white supremacists have used violence to undermine legitimately elected governments seen as benefiting people of color.

Also, importantly, there are multiple ways of measuring political violence, and we don’t necessarily have an agreed-upon approach or particularly great data for tracking it. By many measures, the United States is in kind of a middling position — far more violent than pretty much any place in Europe, but less so than many other nations. Yet it’s still unusually violent for a democracy with an advanced economy.

Some surveys of officeholders help us understand the scale of the problem. Princeton’s Bridging Divides Initiative shows that roughly half of local officeholders claim to have been insulted, and a third regularly report being harassed. Between 10 and 20 percent regularly report being threatened.

Source: Princeton Bridging Divides Initiative

Now, one could just argue that this is simply part of the job, and officeholders should have a tough skin. Fine, but these hostile experiences seem to have effects on people. As this chart shows, many local officials feel dissuaded from various public actions due to the insults, harassment, and threats they’ve receive. Roughly 60% say they’re less likely to post on social media, half say they won’t work on controversial topics, about 40% say they won’t run for reelection or for another office, etc. That’s bad! Even if these people aren’t being physically attacked, some are being silenced, or even driven out of politics.

Source: Princeton Bridging Divides Initiative

But if these actions are silencing voices or driving people out of politics, that effect is not being experienced universally. According to the BDI studies, some 31% of men in public office, but 49% of women in public office, report concerns about harassment. In a study of former members of Congress run by the University of Massachusetts, far more women and people of color said they had been threatened while in office than either Democrats or Republicans as a whole did:

Source: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Now, it’s not clear whether women and people of color are more likely to be harassed/threatened or whether they are more likely to report aggressive behavior as harassment or a threat. Both may well be true. But it does mean that women and people of color are more likely to be deterred from political action thanks to these threats. That is, they’re more likely to be silenced, to be discouraged form running or from working on controversial issues.

Even within a party there can be important differences along these lines. In my surveys of Republican county party chairs, I asked chairs whether they are afraid of some of the people who show up at party meetings. 16% of those chairs opposed to Donald Trump said they were afraid, but only 5% of Trump supporters agreed with that statement. In other words, just the threat of violence may have a greater impact on Trump’s Republican detractors than on his allies. It’s at least part of the story of how he continues to dominate the party.

Political commentators tend to worry about what will happen in U.S. politics if violence becomes more common. But we should keep in mind the tax that political violence is already imposing on our system.

[Thanks to Alexandra Filindra for some suggestions for this piece]