Thomas Matthew Crooks and Ryan Routh, the men behind a recent assassination attempt on former President Trump, challenge stereotypes of political assassins. They discuss their motivations, revealing a lack of clear political agendas, which raises questions about modern political violence. Acclaimed Atlantic writer Tom Nichols joins to explore the implications of their actions on democracy, the evolution of assassin profiles since the 1970s, and the role of social media in shaping these narratives. This conversation delves into the chaotic nature of contemporary political rage.
The evolution of modern political assassins reflects a shift from ideological motivations to personal grievances and a craving for fame.
Societal factors, including social media and narcissism, significantly influence individuals to engage in violence as a means of seeking recognition.
Deep dives
The Nature of Modern Assassination
Recent attempts on public figures, like Donald Trump, raise questions about the motivations behind modern assassins. Unlike historical assassinations, which often had clear political agendas, modern would-be assassins appear to lack coherent motivations. The discussion highlights notable figures from the past, such as Squeaky Fromm and Sarah Jane Moore, who had tangible political beliefs. In contrast, current cases reflect a trend toward apolitical individuals driven by personal grievances or a desire for notoriety.
Cultural Influences on Violence
The podcast examines how societal factors, particularly social media and cultural narratives, contribute to the emergence of individuals who resort to violence for recognition. It draws parallels between films like "Taxi Driver" and contemporary behavior, suggesting that feelings of isolation and a yearning for fame can motivate violent actions. Narcissism among disaffected young men is identified as a significant factor underlying these behaviors, prompting them to believe that violent acts will lead to acknowledgment and fame. The discussion emphasizes that these individuals often have a blend of insecurity and a desire for significance, fuelling their dangerous choices.
Distinguishing Political Violence from Personal Grievances
The episode underscores the risk of conflating individual acts of violence with organized political motives. While there are historic examples of politically motivated violence, recent cases often stem from personal issues rather than a coherent ideological agenda. The hosts argue that many attackers search for causes post-factum to justify their actions, indicating a deeper societal malaise. This distinction is crucial as it impacts how society responds to and understands acts of violence, cautioning against oversimplifying complex motivations.
One prevailing stereotype of a political assassin is someone with strong convictions. Another stereotype conjures up James Bond, a professional with a silencer acting on higher orders.
But Thomas Matthew Crooks and Ryan Routh, the two men who attempted to assassinate former President Donald Trump earlier this year, represent an evolution in the idea of this kind of attacker. Nothing in their backgrounds turned up consistent themes about their political beliefs. Neither left behind a manifesto or seemed to have connections to any group or movement.
We talk with Atlantic staff writer Tom Nichols about the nature of these modern would-be assassins. Why would this era of seemingly more prevalent political violence produce an apolitical would-be assassin? What’s the difference between an individual and a government attempting an assassination? Why are assassination attempts more common in certain eras of history? And have the stereotypes about assassins simply reflected a desire to impose a taxonomy on chaotic minds?
Get more from your favorite Atlantic voices when you subscribe. You’ll enjoy unlimited access to Pulitzer-winning journalism, from clear-eyed analysis and insight on breaking news to fascinating explorations of our world. Subscribe today at TheAtlantic.com/podsub.