Thread by @sundersays

Another good & well argued piece about the need for vigilance about the corrosive danger of political and other conspiracy theories.

https://twitter.com/wallaceme/status/1348922998728892416

It's good to see pro-Leave voices making this accurate distinction. The conflation of Trump fraud claims and violence/Remain campaigns is mainly childish knockabout politics for clicks that therefore fails to take the foundations of democracy seriously

Its legit to make arguments like: the Leave campaign made promises they couldn't keep. Or second referendum campaign deserved to suffer because democratic case for implementing first vote before rejoin debate.

But have to accept outcomes of process

There is a world of difference between arguing that BBC was unfair to independence/the Union or Leave/Remain and arguing that ballot boxes get stuffed by security services.But some care needs to be taken about where "unfair" claims about opponents, media cross the line on consent

Key to *political* conspiracy claims l (Trump: we got 75 million American Patriotic votes: there is no way *they* got 80 million real votes, as The People stand with me) is can not conceive of opponents as democrats, fellow citizens who disagree.

So cast as Enemy Within + Fraud

Not enough to just draw the line at the advocacy of violence if there is heightened rhetoric to legitimise your opponents as not democrats.

Cf rhetorical attacks on Tories, on Commies, on Woke/Cultural Marxists, on disloyal Rejoiners as fifth column,on all Leavers as xenophobes

Arguing Labour want to let prisoners out for its local election vote is ridiculous. Govt can argue the opposition is weak on crime. Casting them as party of criminals (+ 5th columnists on Brexit + minorities, not the majority) is crossing the line of decent democratic discourse.

There are lots of opportunities for "whataboutery" in every direction.

That is inevitably part of knockabout partisam politics. It is often part of the problem of the defence of democratic norms - especially if it starts to excuse *our* transgressions because of *theirs*

I am increasingly of the view that (while challenging opponents is entirely legitimate as part of democratic politics) almost all of the effective contributions to securing foundational norms come from whether or not people act to uphold norms & standards within their own tribes.

How do we tackle prejudice in polarised times? This speech ahead of the 2019 general election makes an analogous argument about decency norms on racism and prejudice in politics
britishfuture.org/tackle-prejudi…

Ethical disgrace of most non-Trump Republicans is they would not have imagined, in 2015, what boundaries they might let slide in 2017-18 nor 3 months ago what most would stay quiet about after election. Several state-level office holders more impressive than many national voices

There are several difficulties in operationalising this. Broader social norms, the sociology of electoral coalitions and of media culture, and whether civic society has relationships across political and social divides are all important factors.

The lack of UK political or media support (beyond a couple of voices) for either pro-Trump violence or his unsubtantiated claims about electoral fraud is a useful indicator of some boundaries to polarisation spillover effects, but its easier to be detached about another country