Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Am I the only one tired of this?
Log In
Email *
Password *
Remember Me
Forgot Your Password?
Log In
New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access
Skip to content Skip to footer
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Magazine
Newsletters
Subscribe
Log In
Search
Subscribe
Donate
Magazine
Latest
Archive
Podcasts
Newsletters
Sections
Politics
World
Economy
Culture
Books & the Arts
The Nation
About
Events
Contact Us
Advertise
Current Issue
Society
/
StudentNation
/ January 29, 2026
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Thinking of political violence solely as a safety issue is not enough to address the harm that follows. “The patient is the community.”
Fareed Salmon
Share
Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky Pocket
Email
Ad Policy
Protesters gather in front of the Federal Building at the protests for Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
(Jon Putman / Getty)
This story was produced for StudentNation, a program of the Nation Fund for Independent Journalism, which is dedicated to highlighting the best of student journalism. For more StudentNation, check out our archive or learn more about the program here. StudentNation is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation. If you’re a student and you have an article idea, please send pitches and questions to [email protected].
Mark Thompson, a young plumber from Orem, Utah, never imagined he would be affected by political violence. He was just another attendee in the crowd on a September afternoon, listening to a speech from a man he both agreed with and disagreed with. He was standing in line, waiting to ask his question, when the shots started. “Everyone just started running as we ducked and scrambled,” he said. “I felt a wave of fear I can’t even describe.”
Months later, that moment still follows him. A slammed door, a car backfiring, a phone dropping—any sudden noise can send his heart racing. “I walked out of the event alive,” he said quietly, “but part of me is still there, running away from a murder.”
The fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk in September 2025 revealed how routine political violence has become in America, and how easily a rally, a campus event, or a public forum can turn into a scene of chaos and fear. But it also revealed the limits of treating political violence solely as a safety and security problem.
Addressing the immediate threat, experts argue, is not enough to address the harm that follows. And today, the level of harm from political violence increasingly looks like a public health crisis.
Political violence refers to the deliberate use of force, which can include bombings, armed rebellions, or assassinations, by state or non-state actors to achieve political or ideological objectives. Between 2014 and 2020, the United States experienced a sharp rise in politically motivated violence, much of it driven by right-wing extremism. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, there were 44 right-wing extremist incidents in 2019 alone, surpassing levels seen in the mid-2000s.
While those numbers dipped during the early months of the pandemic, political …
Am I the only one tired of this?
Log In
Email *
Password *
Remember Me
Forgot Your Password?
Log In
New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access
Skip to content Skip to footer
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Magazine
Newsletters
Subscribe
Log In
Search
Subscribe
Donate
Magazine
Latest
Archive
Podcasts
Newsletters
Sections
Politics
World
Economy
Culture
Books & the Arts
The Nation
About
Events
Contact Us
Advertise
Current Issue
Society
/
StudentNation
/ January 29, 2026
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Thinking of political violence solely as a safety issue is not enough to address the harm that follows. “The patient is the community.”
Fareed Salmon
Share
Copy Link
X (Twitter)
Bluesky Pocket
Ad Policy
Protesters gather in front of the Federal Building at the protests for Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
(Jon Putman / Getty)
This story was produced for StudentNation, a program of the Nation Fund for Independent Journalism, which is dedicated to highlighting the best of student journalism. For more StudentNation, check out our archive or learn more about the program here. StudentNation is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation. If you’re a student and you have an article idea, please send pitches and questions to [email protected].
Mark Thompson, a young plumber from Orem, Utah, never imagined he would be affected by political violence. He was just another attendee in the crowd on a September afternoon, listening to a speech from a man he both agreed with and disagreed with. He was standing in line, waiting to ask his question, when the shots started. “Everyone just started running as we ducked and scrambled,” he said. “I felt a wave of fear I can’t even describe.”
Months later, that moment still follows him. A slammed door, a car backfiring, a phone dropping—any sudden noise can send his heart racing. “I walked out of the event alive,” he said quietly, “but part of me is still there, running away from a murder.”
The fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk in September 2025 revealed how routine political violence has become in America, and how easily a rally, a campus event, or a public forum can turn into a scene of chaos and fear. But it also revealed the limits of treating political violence solely as a safety and security problem.
Addressing the immediate threat, experts argue, is not enough to address the harm that follows. And today, the level of harm from political violence increasingly looks like a public health crisis.
Political violence refers to the deliberate use of force, which can include bombings, armed rebellions, or assassinations, by state or non-state actors to achieve political or ideological objectives. Between 2014 and 2020, the United States experienced a sharp rise in politically motivated violence, much of it driven by right-wing extremism. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, there were 44 right-wing extremist incidents in 2019 alone, surpassing levels seen in the mid-2000s.
While those numbers dipped during the early months of the pandemic, political …
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Am I the only one tired of this?
Log In
Email *
Password *
Remember Me
Forgot Your Password?
Log In
New to The Nation? Subscribe
Print subscriber? Activate your online access
Skip to content Skip to footer
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Magazine
Newsletters
Subscribe
Log In
Search
Subscribe
Donate
Magazine
Latest
Archive
Podcasts
Newsletters
Sections
Politics
World
Economy
Culture
Books & the Arts
The Nation
About
Events
Contact Us
Advertise
Current Issue
Society
/
StudentNation
/ January 29, 2026
Should We Treat Political Violence as a Public Health Crisis?
Thinking of political violence solely as a safety issue is not enough to address the harm that follows. “The patient is the community.”
Fareed Salmon
Share
Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky Pocket
Email
Ad Policy
Protesters gather in front of the Federal Building at the protests for Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
(Jon Putman / Getty)
This story was produced for StudentNation, a program of the Nation Fund for Independent Journalism, which is dedicated to highlighting the best of student journalism. For more StudentNation, check out our archive or learn more about the program here. StudentNation is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation. If you’re a student and you have an article idea, please send pitches and questions to [email protected].
Mark Thompson, a young plumber from Orem, Utah, never imagined he would be affected by political violence. He was just another attendee in the crowd on a September afternoon, listening to a speech from a man he both agreed with and disagreed with. He was standing in line, waiting to ask his question, when the shots started. “Everyone just started running as we ducked and scrambled,” he said. “I felt a wave of fear I can’t even describe.”
Months later, that moment still follows him. A slammed door, a car backfiring, a phone dropping—any sudden noise can send his heart racing. “I walked out of the event alive,” he said quietly, “but part of me is still there, running away from a murder.”
The fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk in September 2025 revealed how routine political violence has become in America, and how easily a rally, a campus event, or a public forum can turn into a scene of chaos and fear. But it also revealed the limits of treating political violence solely as a safety and security problem.
Addressing the immediate threat, experts argue, is not enough to address the harm that follows. And today, the level of harm from political violence increasingly looks like a public health crisis.
Political violence refers to the deliberate use of force, which can include bombings, armed rebellions, or assassinations, by state or non-state actors to achieve political or ideological objectives. Between 2014 and 2020, the United States experienced a sharp rise in politically motivated violence, much of it driven by right-wing extremism. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, there were 44 right-wing extremist incidents in 2019 alone, surpassing levels seen in the mid-2000s.
While those numbers dipped during the early months of the pandemic, political …
0 Comments
0 Shares
41 Views
0 Reviews
