Palm Springs Explosion
Lily Donahue and Awa B. | 30 May 2025
Summary
On 17 May 2025, a car bomb at a Palm Springs fertility clinic killed the perpetrator and injured 4. The perpetrator allegedly espoused anti-natalist and "pro-mortalist" views, opposing IVF and human existence.
The attack represents a pattern of lone-wolf terrorism, on the rise due to online radicalisation.
Birth remains highly politicised in America following Roe v. Wade's overturn, with cases like Georgia keeping a brain-dead pregnant woman on life support against her family's wishes.
A car bomb exploded outside of a Palm Springs fertility clinic on 17 May, killing the perpetrator and injuring 4 others. The attack occurred when the clinic was closed, but still caused widespread damage to the facility’s consultation offices and surrounding buildings. Though spurred by alleged “anti-natalist” views and a destructively chaotic nihilism, the attack was imbued with a certain American violence: this is a country not unused to abortion clinic bombings, to shootings in heavily populated places, to weaponisation of ideology.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Los Angeles field office is treating the attack as an “intentional act of terrorism,” though the perpetrator’s ideas were niche and do not seem to correspond to ideologies more typical within the United States. FBI Assistant Director Akil Davis confirmed the attack was deliberately aimed at the clinic: “Make no mistake—this was a targeted act of terrorism.”
The blast originated from a 2010 silver Ford Fusion, which investigators say was packed with high-grade explosives. According to former ATF bomb expert Scott Sweetow, the explosion's focused trajectory suggests the suspect may have intentionally parked the vehicle to direct the force into the clinic, although he may not have fully understood the blast physics involved. Sweetow noted that the strength of the explosion suggests the use of high-grade explosives similar to ammonium nitrate, a commonly available - but heavily regulated - substance. The materials may have been obtained through hobbyist loopholes or online channels, raising new concerns about the ease of access to such chemicals.
25-year-old Guy Edward Barkus, the perpetrator, had previously written of his opposition to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) - something he deemed “extremely wrong” - and his desire to see a decrease in population. Perhaps even more fringe was Barkus’ identification as a “pro-mortalist” - a belief that advocates the extinction of all conscious life to prevent potential future suffering. A manifesto currently being analysed by law enforcement and thought to have been written by Barkus, espouses “sterilising this planet of the disease of life.” Writing that “nobody got my consent to bring me here,” the author furthered these beliefs: “Life can only continue as long as people hold the delusional belief that it is not a zero sum game causing senseless torture, and messes it can never, or only partially, clean up.” Notably, however, the antinatalist movement broadly condemns violence.
While many anti-natalists point to environmental concerns and emphasise the lack of consent in being born, some of the anti-natalist movement is surprisingly granular. Anti-natalist philosopher David Benatar, outlining a list of quotidian human experiences, points to these as proof that the human condition is one of misery - or at least, extreme discomfort - even for people who think they are leading fruitful lives: humans have to eat and drink and so vacillate between being hungry and thirsty; we may be sleepy and wish for a nap that is never to come; we may be too hot, too cold; we want to be young and energetic, and yet we “age relentlessly”. Still, Benatar believes, death is not the answer: “Life is bad, but so is death […]both life and death are, in crucial respects, awful.” The life-death balance seems purgatorial, a no-man’s land of existing in something bad and waiting for something equally horrid. Better, Benatar argues, to never enter life at all.
Regardless of “mainstream” anti-natalism’s credo of non-violence, Barkus - whether or not the author of the manifesto - has become one of a growing contingent of isolated, enraged young men, fed off a steady diet of online radicalisation and alienation. Unlike terror attacks, which previously would have relied on extensive networks or at least small cells of like-minded individuals, the lone actor is no longer so uncommon. His act was less inspired by anti-natalist views than by a compulsion towards destruction. Still, the focus it brings to questions of birth is, in many ways, especially American: birth is more politicised in the United States than it is in most other states, and the US would consider its cohort.
The overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022 saw the conservative Supreme Court argue that abortion rights were not “deeply rooted” in the US, and as such, should be left to individual states, instead of remaining federally protected. In many states, this ruling has led to draconian measures: Adriana Smith, a 30-year-old Georgian woman, who was declared brain dead after blood clots were found in her brain, is currently being kept on life support - against her family’s wishes - because she is pregnant. (Smith was nine weeks pregnant when she was declared brain dead. Her mother is distraught: “It’s torture for me.”) While the family has linked this to Georgia’s strict abortion laws - the “heartbeat” bill, which declares an abortion cannot happen if a foetal heartbeat is detected - a spokesperson for Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr has said the law does not come into play in Smith’s circumstances. Georgia Senator Ed Setzler, however, drew a direct link: “I’m thankful for the hospital recognising the full value of this small human life that’s living inside of this tragically dying young mother.”
Such situations have become more inflammatory in an increasingly polarised nation. Anti-Trump protests have remained well-attended and consistent, especially as immigrants are deported withno due process.
Pax Ahimsa Gethen/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA 4.0
Forecast
Short-term (Now - 3 months)
Federal agencies will highly likely widen domestic terror watchlists to include nontraditional ideologies such as anti-natalism, and pro-mortalism.
Lawmakers will likely begin debating the classification and prosecution of ideologically driven violence that falls outside historical patterns like religious fundamentalism or white nationalism.
Impacted patients and staff will likely receive trauma counselling, and clinics may incorporate psychological support and emergency preparedness into patient care protocols.
Insurance providers have a realistic possibility of beginning to treat acts of ideological violence as a covered risk category, prompting higher premiums or new policies for fertility clinics.
Medium-term (3-12 months)
IVF and fertility centres will likely improve security measures, such as surveillance systems and secure perimeters.
State and federal legislators have a realistic possibility of providing grants or subsidies to help reproductive health facilities bolster physical security infrastructure.
Long-term (>1 year)
The attacks will likely result in bipartisan efforts to increase funding for domestic extremism prevention, particularly targeting ideologically radicalised individuals operating outside known hate groups.
Law enforcement and academic institutions will likely invest in AI-driven tools for the early detection of online radicalisation based on philosophical or existential ideologies.
