NICD, a non-partisan organization based at the University of Arizona that would promote healthy and civil political debate. The National Institute for Civil Discourse integrates research, practice and policy to support and engage: Elected officials who are capable of working to solve the big issues facing our country. A public that demands civil discourse as well as government that works in the best interests of the country as a whole. A media that informs citizens in a fair and responsible way.
Search
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
Recommended
Democracy under Fire In Minnesota- Protect Democracy with Words, Not Weapons
The pattern is unmistakable: Americans expressing their views—whether as elected officials or peaceful protesters—are being targeted with violence. This is not a partisan issue. It is a national emergency.
Over the years, The Fulcrum has covered the rise of political violence in America—from Charlottesville to the murder of George Floyd, from the January 6th attack on the Capitol to the 2024 assassination attempt on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. The common thread in each of these tragedies is the abandonment of dialogue in favor of domination.
As Americans, we must stand united in rejecting violence as a tool of political expression. The overwhelming majority of Americans condemn political violence, and our leaders must reinforce this norm not just in words but through decisive action. Violence and intimidation must never become the cost of leadership. Elected office is public service, not a battlefield.
In times of crisis, leaders' words shape how communities respond. We echo the guidance we published last year in The Fulcrum’s piece, “How Leaders and the Media Talk About Political Violence Matters,” by Jennifer Dresden and
Laura Livingston. Leadership—especially in moments like this—must model responsibility, restraint, and resolve. The principles they outlined then are no less vital today, and they guide our leadership of The Fulcrum. Condemnation is not enough. We must also ask:
- Are leaders swiftly and unequivocally condemning violence?
- Are they resisting the urge to vilify entire groups or dehumanize political opponents?
- Are they guiding public anger toward constructive, democratic action?
This moment is a stress test for the nation’s moral compass. Will we allow fear and violence to shape our political future, or will we recommit to the democratic values that have sustained us through darker hours than this? Will we demand our leaders uphold words and actions that stand up to violence?
People often say that political violence is un-American. While it’s true that violence is woven throughout American history, it’s also true that the American identity has always been aspirational. The time to reach for better is now. Our democracy cannot survive if participation becomes a death sentence.
We call on Americans—citizens, leaders, and media alike—to turn this grief into a galvanizing moment. Let us protect protestors. Let us safeguard elected officials. Let us ensure that disagreement is met with dialogue, not gunfire.
As Barack Obama said, “We can disagree without being disagreeable.” And in the words of the late Sen. John McCain at the 2004 Republican National Convention: "We are Americans first, Americans last, Americans always. Let us argue our differences. But remember we are not enemies, but comrades in a war against a real enemy, and take courage from the knowledge that our military superiority is matched only by the superiority of our ideals, and our unconquerable love for them."
For the victims in Minnesota, the wounded protester in Utah, and every citizen who either exercised their democratic rights on June 14th or stood in solidarity with those who did : we must do better. Democracy's future depends on the choices we make today.
David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Kristina Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
SUGGESTION: Manhunt in Minnesota Following “Politically Motivated” Shootings
A vehicle belonging to Vance Boelter is towed from the alley behind his home on June 14, 2025 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Boelter is a suspect in the shooting of two Democratic-Farmer-Labor lawmakers. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
Manhunt in Minnesota Following “Politically Motivated” Shootings
Boelter was a private sector representative to the Minnesota governor's workforce development council. Appointed by Gov. Mark Dayton in 2016, then reappointed by Gov. Tim Walz in 2019, his term expired in 2023. The Governor’s Office appoints thousands of people from all parties to these unpaid boards and commissions.
Boelter's current employment includes serving as the director of security patrols at Praetorian Guard Security Services, based in the Twin Cities metro area. According to the company's website, Praetorian offers a range of armed home security services, including residential security patrols, uniformed armed security personnel, and event security services.
CNN reports that Boelter often stayed in the rented home of his longtime friend David Carlson. Carlson said Boelter was a conservative who voted for President Donald Trump and was strongly against abortion rights. But he noted Boelter never mentioned any particular issue with the lawmakers who were shot.
Carlson also shared concerning text messages that Boelter had sent him earlier in the day: "I may be dead shortly, so I just want to let you know that I love you guys both, and I wish it hadn’t gone this way."
Trump said the shootings "will not be tolerated in the United States of America" and vowed the shooter who carried out the attacks will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
“The Hoffmans are out of surgery at this time and receiving care, and we are cautiously optimistic, they will survive this assassination attempt,” Walz said at a news conference Saturday afternoon.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum. He is the publisher of the Latino News Network.
