How Influencers Indirectly Mobilize Action and Legitimate Violence
Some posts feature positive sentiments of the Unite the Kingdom rally, emphasizing the success of the movement through frequent references to the size of the event. The ingroup is positioned as the “resistance that clearly terrifies the establishment” and “there is no political solution. You, the people, are the solution”, framing protest participation as a moral imperative to the movement’s success.
Throughout, Tommy Robinson establishes himself as a prototypical group member and opinion leader through displays of authenticity and shared identity markers like parenthood. Equally, his arrest at the Unite the Kingdom rally becomes evidence of prototypicality: Tommy Robinson is targeted precisely because he is so representative of the ingroup. Claiming “First they come for Tommy” his arrest becomes an omen of the group’s fate.
How the “Great Replacement” Conspiracy Connects Outgroups
As protests progress to riots, sophisticated conspiracy narratives emerge to explain the multitude of perceived threats. Multiple outgroups – Muslims, immigrants, the government, mainstream media, and police – are connected through strategic juxtaposition of posts and explicit conspiracies. Muslims and immigrants represent the dangerous other, combining grievances of immediate violence with cultural replacement fears. Government, mainstream media, and the police represent elite authorities, with police reframed as enforcers of the government’s will, abandoning their role of people’s protectors.
These groups are connected through conspiracy narratives, linking demographic change, cultural transformation, and perceived betrayal by the government. Specifically, Robinson claims the government is manipulating the media, police, and Muslims to encourage violence against protesters, using the Great Replacement conspiracy theory to accuse Labour of replacing white people with immigrants so they can stay in power, creating urgency to act in the face of existential threat.
Indirect Mobilization and Violence Legitimation
Mobilization efforts are largely indirect, relying on emotional appeals and providing targets against which outrage can be directed. The deaths of three girls are frequently referenced, highlighting existential threat and anger. Violence is portrayed as a last resort, reluctantly adopted by the ingroup, justified by outgroups having successfully achieved their aims through rioting. As violence escalates, posts emphasize the violence experienced by the ingroup from police and counter-protesters.
Throughout, Tommy Robinson employs strategic ambiguity by explicitly condemning violence whilst simultaneously inflaming the emotions that fuel it. Appeals to refrain from violence are accompanied by reminders about long-term goals of the movement, prompting followers to “prepare for what is to come”.
Practical Implications
● Indirectly mobilizing content is “lawful but awful” - any one post does not directly violate content guidelines but taken together they convey harmful or hateful ideas. Content moderation may therefore be ineffective at taking down indirectly mobilizing content and users.
● Through setting group norms rather than explicit calls for action influencers maintain plausible deniability. Current legal frameworks require explicit mobilization and thus indirect mobilization strategies allow influencers to avoid prosecution under laws related to incitement.
● Broadcast-style channels (like Telegram) and algorithmic amplification allow influencers to dominate discourse with minimal follower input, creating perceptions of consensus. Platform design choices directly shape how effectively influencers can set norms and mobilize followers.
Darja Wischerath is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Bath, interested in radicalization, violence, conspiracy narratives, and far-right ideologies. This article is published courtesy of the Center for Research and Evidence on Security Threats(CREST).
