>"the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left"
Is that known for a fact?
Implying that someone 'silently condoned' something is very convenient because it's basically impossible to prove or disprove, it's like accusing someone of thoughcrime.
A certain fraction of Twitter regularly celebrates the death of American politicians they personally dislike, and the Netherlands is populated by the same species as America. The only truly debatable word in that claim is "large."
"The only truly debatable word in that claim is "large.""
The difference between 'this has popular support' and 'there are a few nutjobs' is kinda key, don't you think? Otherwise you might as well write 'a large section of leftists cut off their own penises"
> also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left.
That is not my impression at all. If there's any sort of "silent condoning" going on then it's very very silent indeed, as I've never encountered it in spite of spending plenty of time in leftist circles. No doubt you can find a few crazy extremists, but they do not get to define "a large fraction on the left".
If that was your goal then you utterly failed and this comment makes it worse. If you want to write something neutral it helps to first understand your own biases.
edit: also, the murder was silently condoned by a large fraction on the left.