How do we solve a problem like Maajid Nawaz, given what now appears to have become a journey to re-radicalisation?

Your advice please - on how some dangers may be averted.

I've been chronicling this but want to step back, by late Jan. So a few ideas on how others might help.
"Don't feed the trolls" is often good advice. There are limits to how much anyone can worry about online misinformation.

I see these 3 reasons why Mr Nawaz is a different case to AN Other tweeters

They may suggest some 'horses for courses' approaches to who could address what.
In November, I thought this was a knockabout online politics debate: was saying Trump could win the Presidency, after Nov 4th, just clutching at straws?

The content in last 3 days & since Jan 5th has been much worse. Hitting a dangerous new low today
The core responsibility of @LBC is to keep their broadcast output within the editorial code and Ofcom regulations.

None of us like to pick public fights with colleagues. An LBC senior reporter Matthew Thompson did set out where the boundary needs to be.
If others feel the content crosses the line, its possible to complain - to LBC or Ofcom. I have done so (once) about an irresponsible and factually wrong "Lockdown Kills" monologue. I have been told I might hear something about that in another 10 days
This was irresponsible broadcasting. Nawaz (taking calls on May's UK local elections) states his view that "responsible citizens" felt the Washington insurrection was their "only option". There had not been a free & fair election in the USA.
People might complain about that one too. A trickier question about LBC. Do broadcasters & media experts have a view?

Should LBC stick to narrow view - all that matters is what is said in their studio (which is much calmer) so none of the online conspiracies are their business?
Clear why an org may do that: it may avoid opening a can of worms. So a Jekyll/Hyde compromise of a calmer "Regulated Maajid" and "Online Maajid" (promoting radicalisng conspiracy memes)?

Any limits to what can be ignored? Reputational? Duty of Care? Threats? Radicalisation?
Two sets of questions for LBC
(1) Is editorial oversight working? Were boundaries crossed on air - eg "lockdown kills" claims; Sidney Powell Dominion allegations were "not conspiracy theory"; US insurrectionists "responsible citizens" pursuing "only option" after stolen election?
(2) Can LBC ignore Online Maajid?

Conflict of Interest also a direct responsibility for LBC. I just do not know if reports/speculation) that MN's strong pro-Trump advocacy reflects QF donors are valid. But it would be part of LBC's job to check it is all above board.
More questions have been asked of @LBC than of @QuilliamOrg which calls itself "the world's first counter-extremism think-tank, with a full spectrum approach to promote pluralism and inspire change".
It tackles extremism of all kinds - and is localising its efforts, with a UK team, a North America team, and a global team
Quilliam seem to have a different focus now to the org when it was very prominent in the UK. It had £1 million of Home Office |funding, 2008-12, in its start-up phase. As far as I know, it has not had UK govt funding in recent years…
QF remained influential after that. While Nawaz was never a formal adviser to David Cameron, to my knowledge, he did tweet that he was "proud to have helped" with the then PM's 2015 speech on Islamism and counter-extremism, saying "our work is taking root"…
Its tricky to find much up-to-date info on the main QF website. The @QuilliamOrg Twitter feed suggests a mainly international focus over the last year. This challenge to Labour engagement with the SWP on 15/10/2020 is the last UK-focused post
This section of the website captures the range of international activities that QF has been involved in recently
QF do say that QAnon may seem like an elaborate joke, but that the "crazy cult" is dangerous and worth taking seriously. They ran a webinar on this with credible experts in October
You can watch the QF seminar on QAnon here.
On Quilliam: the organisation considers the QAnon theory a dangerous form of extremism. Do they need to engage privately and/or publicly with their founder becoming rather adjacent to it, and to related forms of unsubstantiated pro-Trump conspiracies since the election?
One suggestion on Quilliam. I feel it is for those who have been supportive and constructively engaged with the work of QF to make this point to QF. (Those who have always been critical of Nawaz/QF can't add much directly there). It is also a legitimate question from the media.
Question: is there anything the counter-extremism policy community could or should be doing about - either to intervene directly; and/or to learn from this episode?

Akeela Ahmed MBE, chair of the anti-Muslim hate working group, has said this
Finally, no mainstream/national media coverage of this (though Washington Post featured Mr Nawaz in a piece on international). He had a high profile as a deradicalised extremist turned inside influencer with New Labour, Cameron and Clegg (for whom he stood in 2015 GE)
I think serious broadsheet, broadcast media could make a useful contribution.
- It would be a way to ask questions (and potentially get some answers).
- Done seriously, this could illuminate several key themes in again topical issues of radicalisation & deradicalisation
This thread suggested by @Sime0nStylites Thanks for your contributions and feedback so far
Background: this openness to and promotion of conspiracy and misinformation is documented here.
Developments: Post-election thread tracking whether or when Mr Nawaz may acknowledge that the certification of President-elect Biden took place (not yet); and/or accept the final outcome of the election process as legitimate (as he said he would)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Sunder Katwala

Sunder Katwala Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @sundersays

13 Jan
This is certainly arguable. (A lot of people argue it).

Different types of claim - principled/ethical ones, and consequential ones (about impact of various courses of action or inaction). It would be interesting to look seriously at what we might predict about the latter.
Mostly people say "this is right - and it will work" or "this feels wrong - and it won't work" which means those two debates get conflated.

Though there are contexts when there is an explicit sense of, for example, a Peace versus Justice trade-off (eg after civil wars).
The most plausible intuition against impeachment is "just 13 days" & also that the current heightened atmosphere could do with defusing.

But that might make a good case for a slower impeachment (or other process). Indictment in office, and trial beyond it.
Read 7 tweets
13 Jan
A tweeter called magalawbrian who claims to be an associate of Powell and Wood sees Trump using the Jan 20th inauguration as a Stop the Steal sting operation, using Space Force. (A revival of the "SCIF" conspiracy theory, where Trump exposes the plot in Scooby Doo style). ImageImageImage
It would be interesting to see polling on support for fraud claims (35%) and/or Jan 6th insurrection (which has been 10-20%) segmented by
- have or have not heard/seen claims that Trump has a plan
- believe Trump can emerge President by Jan 20th (or eg March 5th).
Read 5 tweets
12 Jan
How to foment radicalisation online.

"Watch Mike Pompeo" is the code to Anerican Patriots

It is about creating a heightened sense of excitement about a major event to change the outcome.

Similar method to the Jan 6th march
The clearly now re-radicalised Maajid Nawaz is on message, tweeting "every 30 minutes"

This is what all the QAnon and pro-Trump networks have been asked to do.

We really must see @lbc & @QuilliamOrg finally stage some intervention after 2 months of increasing reradicalisation
Few of the contributors to the China conspiracy letter have any Covid Covid credentials. Most have championed the Trump fraud claims. The glossy video suggest the letter's timing may be coordinated rather than coincidental
Read 27 tweets
12 Jan
As the director of @QuilliamOrg @maajidnawaz should today disassociate from this toxicly anti-Muslim coauthor of his China's Covid Conspiracy open letter to the FBI and MI5. Could @davidtoube & others please apply their principles to this v clear case?
It is a small group of 10 people who coauthored or consigned the letter
This is Sabhlok, one of the group of 10 with Nawaz (director of Quilliam) and Dolan (of KBF). He has a full house of strange and cranky views and no boundaries against overt anti-Muslim prejudice
Read 5 tweets
12 Jan
Another good & well argued piece about the need for vigilance about the corrosive danger of political and other conspiracy theories.
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
Read 13 tweets
12 Jan
Having tweeted Americans should "arm themselves to defend rights" so as to "end any politician or lobbyist" who are "collaborators", Brian O'Shea says its a typo (?). 'Stalkers' lost their minds" by imagining any openness to violence in literal call to arms against collaborators
I am left unclear as to how the priority given to procuring guns (as well as to using cash) would help in what is now (thankfully) an entirely non-violent advocacy of how to defend rights and save the free world from any politician or any lobbyist identified as a "collaborator"
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!