Displaying the most recent of 93649 posts written by

Ruth King

Christopher F. Rufo The Fury That Led to Nothing: George Floyd Square The run-down intersection at 38th Street and Chicago Avenue in Minneapolis exposes the empty promises of the revolution of 2020.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/minneapolis-george-floyd-square

When I arrived in Minneapolis, the frost had just lifted, and gray clouds hung low over the horizon. I had come to make a pilgrimage to George Floyd Square, where the revolution of 2020 began. It has been more than five years since Floyd lost his life and became a patron saint of the Left, and I wanted to see what had happened here since then.

The square is situated in a run-down intersection that now features a statue of a clenched black fist in the central roundabout. On one corner stands a minimarket called Unity Foods—formerly Cup Foods—where George Floyd passed the counterfeit bill that set off the chain of events that culminated in his death. Across the street is an abandoned gas station that has been covered in graffiti and protest slogans since the initial unrest.

A group of vagrants had lit a bonfire in a metal drum beneath the gas station canopy. When I asked them about Floyd, they avoided the question; they weren’t interested in politics. They had chosen the spot to light fires, fence stolen goods, and smoke fentanyl, because it was peaceful and nobody bothered them.

In the frenzied year of 2020, politicians in Minneapolis and the Minnesota state government made grand promises about what George Floyd Square would become. They purchased property and pledged monuments. Then, as the years passed, their political will evaporated and everything ground to a halt. One city official told me the neighborhood wanted to reopen for business, while political leaders wanted to preserve the square as an ideological symbol. The result: nobody got what he wanted.

The scars of the revolution remain. The intersection at 38th Street and Chicago Avenue now has an eerie feeling, as if the George Floyd moment were frozen in time. A shattered window at Unity Foods has remained unrepaired for five years. The graffiti on the bus-stop shelters has started to chip and peel. The slogans scrawled on the gas station walls are fading reminders of the naive ebullience of that early moment.

As I walked around, I spotted two smartly dressed white women who appeared to be visiting the square as one might a religious shrine. Striking up a conversation, I learned that one was a Minneapolis resident; the other, her sister, was visiting from New York City. They wanted to pay their respects to Floyd. They seemed to be trying not to show fear at the visible homelessness and disorder.

When I asked the women about Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey, the local woman said, “No comment.” She instead shifted the conversation to President Trump, who, she said, was “clawing back all of the progress” that had been made toward social justice.

Yes, Al Jazeera, There IS a Christian Genocide in Nigeria “The blood of thousands of Nigerian martyrs cries out for justice.” by Mark Tapson

https://www.frontpagemag.com/yes-al-jazeera-there-is-a-christian-genocide-in-nigeria/

A few weeks ago on his Real Time program, host Bill Maher broke ranks with his mainstream media compatriots, as he occasionally does, to fault them for the widespread ignorance of the ongoing persecution of Christians in Nigeria. He observed correctly that the Boko Haram Muslim terror group there is “literally attempting to wipe out the Christian population of an entire country.” He even had statistics at the ready: “They’ve killed over 100,000 since 2009, they’ve burned 18,000 churches.” He concluded, “Where are the kids protesting this?”

The mainstream media are not covering it, and “the kids” aren’t protesting it, because the purportedly compassionate Left is at best indifferent to, and at worst approves of, the suffering and extermination of Christians. In their multiculturalist mindset, Christianity is categorized as Eurocentric (read: “white”) and therefore oppressive and evil. For a similar reason, Leftists refuse to connect Islam with terrorism because Muslims are grouped with the sacrosanct “Other” – “brown” victims of Judeo-Christian, capitalist, white supremacist oppression. Hence, the Left freely hurls accusations of “Islamophobia” but there is no “Christophobia” equivalent.

This week my colleague Robert Spencer pointed out at Jihad Watch that the Al Jazeera network, the “CNN of the Arab world,” had previously rebutted Maher’s observation with this gaslighting doozy of an editorial: “No, Bill Maher, There is No ‘Christian Genocide’ in Nigeria.” Spencer says of the piece that “the hypocrisy is staggering and the inversion of reality total,” but hey, as the Muslim prophet Muhammad is claimed to have said, “War is deceit.”

The Al Jazeera article was written by Gimba Kakanda, Senior Special Assistant to the President of Nigeria on Research and Analytics in the Office of the Vice President (I don’t know how he gets all that on a business card). Kakanda argues that “allegations” of a Christian genocide in Nigeria are merely “coordinated attacks” by “foreign actors” who “ignore [the country’s] complexities and manipulate longstanding ethnic and resource-based tensions to advance sectarian agendas.” He declared that “claims of a religious war between Muslims and Christians in Nigeria are simplistic” and ignore “ethnic rivalries, land disputes, and criminality.”

Kakanda zeroed in on Bill Maher’s “sensationalized account” based on “largely fabricated claims and manipulated images from unverified outlets.” He dismissed it as “misinformation – aimed at maligning Nigeria” because of its “support for a two-state solution to the Palestinian conflict.”

The Real Manchurian Candidate: Fifty Years of China’s Quiet Conquest For over half a century, Washington’s political class—led by Kissinger’s secret diplomacy—has cloaked China’s rise in promises of peace, betraying America from within. By Lee Smith

https://amgreatness.com/2025/10/22/the-real-manchurian-candidate-fifty-years-of-chinas-quiet-conquest/

The following is an excerpt from The China Matrix: The Epic Story of How Donald Trump Shattered a Deadly Pact.

The story of betrayal related here begins nearly a decade later, in 1971, and it’s notable how many themes it shares with the fictional Hollywood account. Hailed as a Cold War classic that captures the period’s paranoid sensibility, The Manchurian Candidate’s representation of propaganda and brainwashing might have prepared the American public for the messaging that accompanied the strengthening of ties between the United States and the People’s Republic of China. As false as the stock praise for Raymond Shaw’s character is the broad assertion, relayed by every US president since Richard Nixon—except for Donald Trump—that the rise of China’s communist party is good for America and conducive to world peace.

Here’s how Nixon put it: “What brings us together is a recognition of a new situation in the world and a recognition on our part that what is important is not a nation’s internal political philosophy,” he told Mao during their historic meeting. “Therefore, we can find common ground, despite our differences, to build a world structure in which both can be safe to develop in our own ways on our own roads.”

With Mao’s death, Gerald Ford said, “I am confident that the trend of improved relations between the People’s Republic of China and the United States, which Chairman Mao helped to create, will continue to contribute to world peace and stability.”

Jimmy Carter said, “The United States and China need to build their futures together.”

In Ronald Reagan’s words, “We can work together as equals in a spirit of mutual respect and mutual benefit… America and China are both great nations. And we have a special responsibility to preserve world peace.”

According to George H.W. Bush, “One of my dreams for our world is that these two powerful giants will continue working toward a full partnership and friendship that will help bring peace and prosperity to people everywhere.”

Bill Clinton wasn’t worried about the rising communist juggernaut: “Our objective is not containment and conflict; it is cooperation. We will far better serve our interests and our principles if we work with a China that shares that objective with us.”

George W. Bush agreed: “China is on a rising path, and America welcomes the emergence of a strong, peaceful, and prosperous China.”

So did Barack Obama: “Our goal is not to counter China. Our goal is not to contain China,” he said. “We want China to succeed.”

And in the words of Joe Biden: “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man. I mean, you know, they’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.”

We Are Not Fooled by You, Hamas by Nils A. Haug

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21999/fooled-by-hamas

“Hamas is not just at war with Israel. It is at war with Jews, Christians, and the very foundations of civilization itself…. This is not politics, this is a religious war. Its purpose is to replace Judaism and Christianity with radical Islam. If the world does not understand this, everyone will pay the price.” — Mosab Hassan Yousef, eldest son of Hamas founder Sheikh Hassan Yousef, JNS, August 17, 2025.

Notwithstanding peace treaties or a tenuous cessation of hostilities between Israel and its neighbors, much of the Islamic world remains at war with the West, especially with many dedicated activists, such as Qatar, Turkey and the Palestinian Authority in its midst.

Their leaders, perhaps not wishing to get into a scrape with Trump, as well as seeing the delicious prospect of being in charge of the future Gaza chicken coop — refuse to acknowledge this reality.

Many leaders in the West also would possibly prefer not to admit the risk, even though their societies are precipitously at risk of being overwhelmed by the mass immigration of Muslims — who boldly practice a competing faith founded on displacing all other faiths. Western leaders appear to wish to placate the Islamist voters in their midst, despite the harm being inflicted on their citizens — with more expected in the offing.

With the release of some 2,000 terrorists from Israel’s prisons as part of the Trump peace plan, Hamas’s forces received a timely reinforcement of their depleted ranks from this event, “None are expected to take up careers in high tech or humanitarian relief,” writes Professor Thane Rosenbaum.

While Israel may have substantially defeated Hamas militarily in the Gaza campaign, it can fittingly be said, as by columnist Dan Schnur, that “Hamas won its war against Israel in the eyes of the rest of the world”. Any success of the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic mass media can be attributed to their lies about Israel and Jews.

The escalating social and political turmoil in nations such as France, Britain, Australia, Spain, Italy and Canada can be directly attributed to domestic Islamist agitation, Muslim demographic explosion, and the spread of religious Islam throughout the infrastructure – which most leaders would rather appease than confront. With mosques being built at a rapid rate, complete with public calls to prayer over loudspeakers, and special Sharia courts, councils and schools, Islam has come to significantly dominate the landscape in the major cities of western Europe. In the UK and France, for instance, certain street scenes are reminiscent of the Muslim cities from where immigrants originated.

In Rosenbaum’s words, “Hamas is not going away easily, even if some leave. The Muslim Brotherhood’s lasting influence over the hearts and minds of Gazan society is ironclad.”

The same may well be true for the generous leaders of the sovereign wealth fund states in the Middle East, who Trump seems to be counting on to rebuild Gaza.

Or maybe Trump can actually pull it off. The time to worry about is after he is no longer president, supervising his dream of Gaza as a Riviera at peace with Israel. What if the prevailing Middle East ideology of eliminating Israel has not changed?

On October 13, 2025, at Israel’s Knesset (Parliament) in Jerusalem, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in the company of US President Donald J. Trump, declared the war in Gaza over.

Oh, really? Sadly, the probability of an enduring peace with Hamas or allied Islamists appears close to zero. After all, in Netanyahu’s words, Israel is dealing with “monsters.”

Muslim Migrants Fuelling the Rise in Anti-Semitic Attacks by Con Coughlin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21985/muslim-migrants-antisemitic-attacks

With counter-terrorism officials warning that the huge influx of illegal immigrants entering European countries could lead to further terrorist atrocities, [Elon] Musk’s warning that the UK needed a “revolutionary government change” to tackle the migrant crisis could not be more timely.

The ability of the UK security authorities to tackle the problem has been undermined by London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who claims that anti-Israel protesters who chant “From the river to the sea” are not anti-Semitic.

Reportedly, supporters of Mamdani are “training 30 more people” to bring his policies to more American cities.

There have already been countless instances of such Islamic violence in Europe and the US, including both World Trade Center attacks (1993 and September 11, 2001), as well as in the UK, Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden and Spain.

The deeply disturbing trends in Europe… should serve as a warning to the US and its Western allies about the dangers of tolerating large-scale immigration, especially concerning migrants who struggle to impose Islamic sharia law and the judicial systems of the countries from which they came, rather than adopt the laws and values of the West.

Elon Musk’s blunt warning that “violence is coming” to the UK because of its failed immigration policy dating back decades has turned out to be chillingly prophetic. Within just weeks of the tech entrepreneur issuing his dire warning, two Jewish worshippers were killed and three others wounded in a terrorist attack on a synagogue in Manchester, carried out by a Muslim jihadi.

The unprovoked attack, which took place on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, should serve as a warning to the US and other Western countries about the dangers of lax immigration policies.

Jihad al-Shamie, the 35-year-old terrorist responsible for carrying out the Manchester synagogue attack, came from a family of Syrian immigrants who had lived in the UK since the 1990s and been granted British citizenship.

Ireland has fallen to the cult of Israelophobia If Catherine Connolly becomes president, hating Israel will become the new state religion. Brendan O’Neill

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/10/20/ireland-has-fallen-to-the-cult-of-israelophobia/

“Israel has become a Satan substitute for post-Catholic Ireland – the new devil against which godless moralists measure their decency. And if Connolly wins, this fervour will be all but institutionalised: Israelophobia as the new state religion. Of course the gurning theatre kids of Kneecap who once hollered ‘Up Hamas’ have given her their Guardianista blessing. A president who doesn’t understand biology, doesn’t care about working-class concerns over immigration and doesn’t seem to know that no amount of ‘history’ can excuse the rape and murder of Jews – good luck, Ireland.”

If the polls are to be believed, Ireland is about to get a president who is more extremist on Gaza than the Palestinian Authority. Where the knackered old PA at least says Hamas should ‘have no role to play’ in post-war Gaza, this lady who looks set to be Ireland’s next head of state thinks that’s poppycock. Hamas is ‘part of the fabric of the Palestinian people’, she croons. Israel and its Western allies should not have ‘any say about Hamas’, she insists. Hamas should not be ruled out from a government role, she said. Yeah, so what if a Jew-hating caliphate rules the rubble of Gaza? No biggie.

Her name is Catherine Connolly. She’s standing as an independent. She’s a former mayor of Galway and has been TD (member of parliament) for Galway West since 2016. She’s one of those wooden old socialists who wishes it was still 1973: think Jeremy Corbyn in a pantsuit. And according to pretty much every poll, she’s a dead cert to take over from the Western world’s smuggest pipsqueak of a politician, Michael D Higgins, in the presidential election later this week. One Israelophobe leaves, another even madder one enters.

No one better embodies the stratospheric aloofness of the Irish ruling class than Catherine Connolly. She has guzzled every flavour of woke Kool-Aid. Naturally she thinks you can have a pair of bollocks and be a woman. She says she has an ‘absolute’ belief that there are more than two genders. When asked how many more, she said: ‘I think that’s up to the person deciding.’ Forget 72 genders – Connolly thinks there are infinite genders. Science be damned, let a million faux sexes flourish! Though I bet if the ‘person deciding’ said there are only two genders, Connolly’s wet-wipe relativism that she dolls up as tolerance would swiftly evaporate.

She was recently asked if ‘trans athletes’ who’ve been through male puberty – ie, blokes – should be allowed to compete against women. She said it’s complicated – the slippery reply of every hack of a politician who is chill about the trashing of women’s sporting glory to appease the hulking tossers in leotards who want to nick their medals. How remarkable, said Brenda Power in the The Times (Ireland), that Connolly is ‘very clear’ that ‘medieval Hamas’ is part of ‘the fabric of the Palestinian people’, but she ‘does not know whether males should compete in female sports’.

Listen – if you are firmer in your belief that a neo-fascist militia should not be ruled out from ruling Gaza than you are about the fact that a person with a schlong is a fella, then you have well and truly fled the realm of reason. Can we pause to reflect on how flat-out mad it is that this once great republic looks set to get a president who thinks Hamas is a democratic organisation and the man tucking his ballbag between his legs before punching the hell out of females in a boxing ring is possibly a woman? It’s morally consistent, I guess. Hamas is virulently misogynistic, and so is the idea that men can become women.

Connolly is high-status opinion made flesh. She wangs on about the ‘existential threat posed by climate change’. She slams the ‘disturbing and unacceptable’ language used by Irish campaigners against uncontrolled immigration, seemingly blissfully unaware of what a burning topic this is among ordinary Irish people.

Like Corbyn, she has even sacrificed her one principled position – her old leftish Euroscepticism – in order to get the keys to Áras an Uachtaráin. There recently emerged a nine-year-old clip where she praises us Brexit voters for ‘exposing the EU’ and having ‘stood up to’ the Remainer elites. Her opponents damned her old words as ‘horrifying’. Horrifying?! What a testament to the obsequious kowtowing of Ireland’s elites to the new empire of Brussels that they think it’s ‘horrifying’ to praise a democratic vote across the Irish Sea. Connolly is backtracking. ‘I wasn’t pro-Brexit’, she said, in tones not heard since those girls of Salem swore they had not consorted with the devil. You can make sympathetic noises about Hamas in Irish politics, but Brexit? Don’t even think about it.

Martin Gurri Socialism with a New York Face A thought experiment

https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-york-city-socialism

Suppose socialism came to New York City for the long term. What would life look like under a leadership wholly committed to that vision?

I acknowledge that this will likely never happen. Too many legal and political obstacles stand in the way. Property rights remain sacrosanct and propertied interests too powerful to dislodge, and cities aren’t autonomous political bodies. The human material may also be lacking: any elected leader could prove an incompetent lightweight, unable to translate ideological commitment into practical governance.

But let’s wave all that aside and conduct a thought experiment. Imagine, in some parallel universe, a brilliant and effective socialist mayor who sweeps into office in a landslide—and discovers, to his amazement, that no higher authority, local or national, stands in his way. We don’t need to strain our imaginations: socialism has been tried before, and sharper minds than mine have analyzed the results. The recommended guide through this purgatory remains Friedrich Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom.

What follows is a tale told in the future tense, an attempt to imagine how the “unconstrained vision” of socialism might play out in an unconstrained New York. It’s speculative fiction, not prophecy. No actual socialists were harmed in the making of this experiment.

What is socialism, truly and really? Allow me to begin with that basic question. The constitution of the Democratic Socialists of America defines it as “a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships.” The weightiest words here are “equitable” and “planning.” Every form of socialism known to history has fixated on absolute equality as the political end—achieved through scientific planning and enforced by the rational application of state power.

Our imaginary new mayor is a proud member of the Democratic Socialists. His first order of business, upon taking office, will be to turn the organization’s ideas into reality. Profit-making, for example, will be deemed criminal. Property will be regulated so thoroughly that it will, in effect, belong to the city. A new planning body—staffed by experts and technocrats—will be established under the mayor’s office. Let’s give it an evocative name: the Central Planning Authority, or CPA. Its mission will be to craft the practical blueprint for socialism with a New York face.

Almost immediately, we run into a contradiction. Socialism promises to place resources under “popular control”—so that, for example, tenants rather than landlords take charge of the buildings they occupy. Yet implementing a “planned economy” requires concentrating immense power in the hands of a small group of government specialists. The two approaches are incompatible. So which path leads to equality?

This contradiction is an intellectual phantom that vanishes in a puff of smoke on first contact with reality. “The public” is an amorphous entity, incapable of organizing anything. Socialism has always been a top-down system, in which a far-seeing vanguard, acting on the public’s behalf, commands the resources needed to achieve the proper degree of equality. The mayor and his planners will embody this new class of visionary leaders. Their mandates will fill the vacuum left by the abolition of the private economy. Tenants who once dreamed of ownership will find that they’ve traded their landlord for a political commissar.

The CPA will set out to control the means of production; it’s the first commandment of socialism. But the means will quickly overwhelm the ends. You can’t control New York’s material resources without also controlling the direction of its 8.5 million private lives. Individual goals and plans must be suppressed. Individualism is hateful to the socialist because it breeds inequality. So if you dreamed of opening a little bodega in Washington Heights, the mayor will say, “Sorry, no.” And if you already own one, you’ll be made, in effect, an employee of the CPA.

Resistance is expected and even welcomed. It will flush capitalist grifters into the open, where they can be preached at and admonished into extinction. Inevitably, a certain amount of conflict will accompany the equalizing process, as hordes of homeless individuals invade formerly private homes and the poor appropriate the goods they need. Violent criminals, the existence of whom the mayor has dismissed as a “capitalist construct,” will seek to settle scores, no doubt through a series of Socratic dialogues with the police.

When Jews are targeted by hate mobs, it’s the Jews who get the blame The planned ban by West Midlands Police on Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from Aston Villa is showing off Britain at its worst Zoe Strimple

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/19/when-jews-targeted-by-hate-mobs-jews-get-blame/

Parasites, diseases, and bugs all steadily work away, boring into their hosts, often unnoticed or brushed aside until the tipping point. Then the damage suddenly explodes, makes itself seen to all, unignorable, catastrophic and very rapid-moving. The chaos mounts fast. Panic stations and urgent action is taken to save the host, restore order, safety and stability. Sometimes it’s too late to do so.

I am reminded of this process of steady poisoning, followed by rapid breakdown, by events of the past few weeks showcasing Islamist and Islamo-Leftist anti-Semitism in this country. 

Barely two weeks after the terrorist attack on Jews heading into the Heaton Park synagogue in Manchester on Yom Kippur came the decision by Birmingham police and the Safety Advisory Group, the body responsible for the safety and security of football in Britain, to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from Aston Villa on November 6. 

This decision followed a campaign by anti-Israel pressure groups, and most shockingly of all, Members of Parliament. 

The groups included Game Over Israel, one of whose members is the vile rap group Bob Vylan (of “death to the IDF” chant fame), and the Hind Rajab Foundation. A damning report on the alleged bad behaviour of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans was produced. This, boasted a member of Game Over Israel to Telegraph Sport, “laid the groundwork” for getting Maccabi fans proscribed.

The MP Ayoub Khan was the frontsman of this campaign. He wrote in a letter, topped with the cringe-making heading Barrister Ayoub Khan MP, that “I welcome the Safety Advisory Group’s decision to advise that Maccabi Tel Aviv fans will not be permitted to attend Villa Park on November 6.” He continued with a masterclass in the craven reasoning that has come to define the public statements of the anti-Israel crowd.

“From the moment that the match was announced, it was clear that there were latent safety risks that even our capable security and police authorities would not be able to fully manage,” went Khan’s statement. “With so much hostility and uncertainty around the match, it was only right to take drastic measures. Sports entertainment events should be enjoyed by all, regardless of their race, ethnicity and background. But there are rare instances where the political dynamics surrounding such spectacles cannot be ignored…”

Sane people the country over will read this screed and give a collective howl of embarrassment and disgust. This is the sort of person who sits in the House of Commons? Someone who says with open smugness and “celebration” that Jewish football fans numbering a few hundred pose “latent safety risks” that the “capable” police could not “manage”? There are “rare instances”, are there, where some people are not welcome?

Trump’s Finest Hour Everything was stacked against Israel. by Jenny Beth Martin

https://www.frontpagemag.com/trumps-finest-hour/

The international establishment, with its long history of being wrong about such matters, didn’t think it could be done. Just two months ago, Foreign Affairs magazine heralded in the title of an article, “Israel Is Fighting a War It Cannot Win.” And only weeks ago, as world leaders gathered in Manhattan for the meetings of the General Assembly of the United Nations, France, the United Kingdom, and Canada, among other nations, took the extraordinary step of recognizing Palestine as an independent state, throwing in the towel on Israel. Publications around the globe offered dreary assessments of Israel’s war against Hamas as a lost cause, and as both a military failure and as the reason for a humanitarian crisis. It seemed that everything was stacked against Israel.

But Israel always possessed significant advantages in its war with Hamas.

The Israeli population is singularly committed to peace and to protecting innocent life, and has remained resolute that the hostages – including the bodies of those whose lives were brutally extinguished by Hamas – must be returned.

National resolve matters very little, though, without a strong leader. In this area, Israel is blessed by the steadfast leadership of Binyamin “Bibi” Netanyahu, the long-serving prime minister who always articulated clear war aims.

Israel, with a total population of less than 10 million, was fighting an unfair war against a terrorist regime that follows no laws or human decency in its plot to destroy Israel. Declining public support around the world, made much worse by biased media, made Israel’s war more complicated and even lonelier.

But Israel had another advantage in this war.

As President Trump made clear in his speech celebrating the peace deal before the Knesset earlier this week, Israel had a secret weapon in this fight. The strength of the United States, with its friendship to Israel and its arsenal of the world’s most devastating military weapons, made the peace deal possible.

Is Political Violence Ever OK? Americans Overwhelmingly Say ‘No’: I&I/TIPP Poll Terry Jones

https://issuesinsights.com/2025/10/20/is-political-violence-ever-ok-americans-overwhelmingly-say-no-ii-tipp-poll/

Political violence has waxed and waned throughout U.S. history. Today, there’s a very clear upswing. But is it widely accepted? No. In fact, Americans overwhelmingly oppose using violence to achieve political goals, and mostly blame major political parties as equal threats to use violent tactics for the sake of political power, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.

A representative sample of Americans were asked: “Do you believe that using violence to achieve political goals is ever justified?”

Respondents made clear they didn’t like violence by either party. Overall, only 9% of those taking the poll said violence for political goals was “always justified,” while sometimes be justified, while 19% said violence was “sometimes justified.” But a significant majority — 62% — said violence was “never justified.” Another 10% weren’t sure.

So overall, 28% believe political violence can be justified, while 62% say never.

This national online I&I/TIPP Poll was conducted from Sept. 30 to Oct. 2, with 1.459 adults participating. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 2.7 percentage points.

This is another case where the political affiliations don’t matter as much. Democrats (9% “always justified,” 14% “sometimes justified,” and 68% “never justified”) aren’t too far away from Republicans (13% “always justified,” 22% “sometimes justified,” and 58% “never justified”) and independents (4% “always justified,” 22% “sometimes justified,” and 63% “never justified”).

Age is a different matter. The younger the respondent, the more likely they are to support political violence as justified. For those ages 18 to 24, it’s 37%, while for those 25 to 44 its 45%; that plummets to 21% for those 45 to 64, and just 9% for those 65+.

Clearly, political violence isn’t a selling point for any party’s message to its followers. And violence as a political tactic wanes as U.S. voters age.

A second question asked the following: “Which group do you believe poses the greater threat of political violence in America today: left-wing extremists, right-wing extremists, both equally, or neither?”

Here the answer is more or less equally split.