Collective action is often equated with progressive politics, but are there aspects of group mobilisations that generalise across contexts? We examine general social and personality psychological factors behind endorsement of group-based violence across different types of violent group mobilisation. Specifically, we focus on the endorsement of group-based violence amongst supporters of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement (N = 394), an immigration-critical group (N = 252), and soccer supporters (N = 445). Across three preregistered studies, we tested an integrative model including personality and social psychological factors. Several effects were consistent across all three contexts, with group-based relative deprivation positively, and honesty-humility negatively, predicting support for violence. Further, amongst BLM supporters and the immigration-critical group, emotionality negatively predicted support for violence, violent intentions, and self-reported aggression/violence. Overall, our results suggest that individuals who endorse violence in different contexts have some psychological factors in common.