Currently an interesting debate ongoing in the anglosphere: Is public shaming 4 political stances ethically justifiable? (In USA WH secretary was kicked out of restaurant & on UK twitter story about woman verbally abused on the train b/c being BrexitCentral supporter.) /1
I do have some thoughts on that: 1) Trump election and Leave victory was also about identity & culture. What on earth do people generally expect? Supporters on both sides promoted a clash of cultures, that won't be pretty and will get nastier. /2
2) I'm a sceptical supporter of militant democracy: I do think certain lines should not b crossed, regardless of public support. Separating children from their parents is plainly evil, I don't think anybody who supports this policy can complain about bad treatment based on it. /3
3) This however doesn't necessarily justify (legal) vigilantism, it just means that if you cross lines you can't complain of being treated badly. /4
4) About the BrexitCentral stuff: Leavers are not a homogenous group. Not everyone who supported it, did it out of pure xenophobia or supports every proposal from Brexit Central or hard Leavers. /5
However, most of the stuff published there would risk economic wellbeing of a lot of people. Question is whether you promote taking substantial risks despite resistance of significant minority you can seriously hope that people don't get angry or hostile. /6
It doesn't justifies bad behaviour though but should make one thing clear: divisive politics leads to further substantial division which might risk eroding civilised debates. /7
While I believe that the reaction of the restaurant is ethically justified, I do have problems with abusive behaviour against people whose stance you essentially don't know. /end
