A #THREAD on polarisation.
Imho, we've arrived at a curious historical juncture, wherein the strategy adopted by either 'side' of *any* issue now follows a familiar format, regardless of what the issue is (I'm NOT claiming "both sides" of a debate have equally valid arguments):
Imho, we've arrived at a curious historical juncture, wherein the strategy adopted by either 'side' of *any* issue now follows a familiar format, regardless of what the issue is (I'm NOT claiming "both sides" of a debate have equally valid arguments):
1) delegitimise opposing organisations/beliefs/groups by claiming they're funded by anti-democratic individuals/organisations with a sinister ulterior/ideological motive
2) flood social/print/online media with divisive rhetoric demonising & negatively stereotyping the other side
2) flood social/print/online media with divisive rhetoric demonising & negatively stereotyping the other side
3) claim supporters of a particular view have been brainwashed/radicalised by sinister anti-democratic forces
4) claim THE TRUTH is being deliberately suppressed
5) claim sections of the media are pushing a grotesquely distorted view
6) exclude non-partisan voices from debate
4) claim THE TRUTH is being deliberately suppressed
5) claim sections of the media are pushing a grotesquely distorted view
6) exclude non-partisan voices from debate
7) claim your side is on 'the right side of history'
8) claim the other side is populated with unthinking & ill-informed bigots
9) claim people/activists who devote a lot of time to a single-issue are paranoid, delusional, obsessive and/or hysterical
8) claim the other side is populated with unthinking & ill-informed bigots
9) claim people/activists who devote a lot of time to a single-issue are paranoid, delusional, obsessive and/or hysterical
10) deny the validity of any claims or concerns raised by those holding a different view
11) claim the other side are acting like intolerant authoritarian 'fascists' or 'Nazis', who are deliberately creating a dystopian future which will benefit only them, & harm everyone else
11) claim the other side are acting like intolerant authoritarian 'fascists' or 'Nazis', who are deliberately creating a dystopian future which will benefit only them, & harm everyone else
12) demonise people on the other side of the debate as an undifferentiated, unreflective, intolerant uncivilised homogenous mass who are incapable of nuance, while praising your side as diverse, reflective, open-minded, tolerant, civilised & capable of nuanced critical thinking
13) claim that the (sometimes "silent") majority of decent people share & support your view
14) mobilise facts, data, anecdotal & other qualitative & quantitative evidence which supports your view, while dismissing or downplaying any evidence which contradicts your view
14) mobilise facts, data, anecdotal & other qualitative & quantitative evidence which supports your view, while dismissing or downplaying any evidence which contradicts your view
15) uncritically support individuals, publications, think tanks, news media, pundits, influencers, journalists, politicians, institutions, corporations, charities etc which share your view, & undermine & demonise those that don't
16) disregard the possibility you might be wrong
16) disregard the possibility you might be wrong
17) escalate claims about what is likely to happen in the near future if your view is not immediately embraced by Government & society
18) escalate demonisation of the opposition using inflammatory rhetoric to suggest their unhinged ideology is a threat to our entire way of life
18) escalate demonisation of the opposition using inflammatory rhetoric to suggest their unhinged ideology is a threat to our entire way of life
Now, to reiterate, I'm NOT saying "both sides" of any debate can be correct, or valid, or even deserve legitimacy - far from it: history continually shows us where some ideas & beliefs can lead.
Nor am I denying some claims made by both sides may well be at least partially true!
Nor am I denying some claims made by both sides may well be at least partially true!
Nor am I denying that 'conspiracies' DO exist: history & evidence reveals that powerful groups & individuals, sometimes with selfish, exploitative, or otherwise sinister motives, do indeed use their wealth & power to exert a highly disproportionate influence on Govts & societies.
And nor am I denying that some supporters of a particular viewpoint don't despicably & wrongly dismiss or downplay very real threats or problems.
I also confess that I personally can be, & often am, highly partisan & passionate concerning many if not all issues - aren't we all?
I also confess that I personally can be, & often am, highly partisan & passionate concerning many if not all issues - aren't we all?
What I AM saying is that if we're not careful, our passion & beliefs CAN have harmful & counterproductive effects, such as producing fear, anxiety, radicalisation, violence, & especially can fuel #polarisation, which imho, harms us all.
And I don't know what the solutions are...
And I don't know what the solutions are...
My concern here is that we're all so exhausted by COVID & the seemingly endless ideological battles on so many fronts, that we're not giving sufficient personal or societal attention to resolving the problem of escalating #polarisation, which history teaches us, rarely ends well.
I understand how this thread might be interpreted as a plea for compromise, which while important, it isn't intended to be.
It's more a plea for reflection & nuance, but mass movements, strikes & 'direct action' have all played a very valuable role in creating a fairer society.
It's more a plea for reflection & nuance, but mass movements, strikes & 'direct action' have all played a very valuable role in creating a fairer society.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
