Your insults remind me of toddler trying to argue. You should let someone more intelligent represent your position. Someone who speaks well and can use more than a childish insult. Leftists do have good points but you should never be the one to try to represent them.
I'm sure they are looking for some sense of organization, a group that they can define and eliminate. That's not going to happen. Read "The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations." This is a leaderless movement where the rhetoric of some inspires others to violence without there being any material connection between the two. It'll increase and it won't stop so long as the conditions continue and so long as these don't morph into an organization with leadership.
Privacy is a concern with both domestic and foreign manufacturers. But there's additional concerns when a foreign manufacturer becomes an enemy state. Weaponization of automated features, surveillance of public infrastructure, and a loss of manufacturing skills are all legitimate concerns.
Unlikely. His motivation was to oppose Charlie Kirk from "spreading hate." That group's objective would have been the opposite. He was radicalized by the far left.
Instead of demonizing a class of person, perhaps you should select someone's writing or speech and then make an argument about something someone actually said. Even better if you turn it into a conversation with two way discourse. Your question just alienates others.
We also have no evidence any of this happened. It is easy to make propaganda when we want to believe it.