The reactions to the Southport stabbings: another example of 'controlled spontaneity'?

Photo by Sivani Bandaru on Unsplash

While observing the unfolding events in the aftermath of the recent murders of three young girls in Southport, I developed a growing sense that much of what I was witnessing did not correspond to instinctive, bottom-up expressions of grief and anger. The rapid emergence of orderly vigils, together with the subsequent multiple and homogenous counterdemonstrations to the rioting of the ‘far right’, raised my suspicions that something more contrived was taking place. On reflection, I got to wondering whether what I was seeing had more to do with a top-down deployment of a specific tool in the state’s propaganda arsenal, one given the oxymoronic name of ‘controlled spontaneity’.  

Controlled Spontaneity: synthesising future responses

In anticipation of terrorist attacks at the 2012 London Olympics, whistle-blowers revealed that the government’s communication experts had hatched a plan that, should a terrorist bombing or other act of mass murder occur, a pre-prepared script would be enacted – ‘controlled spontaneity’ – to ensure that public responses conveyed empathy for the victims and a sense of unity with strangers, rather than displays of anger and retaliatory violence. This planned reaction to an atrocity might incorporate a range of elements (social media hashtags, Instagram images, vigils, street posters) so as to give the impression of impromptu grassroots displays of love, togetherness and tolerance, along with messages that resonate with the government narrative of the day.

One stark example of ‘controlled spontaneity’ in action was the aftermath of the London Bridge terror attack in 2017 when the response involved the staged appearance of one hundred imams at the crime scene. And it is reasonable to speculate about the role of the state’s propagandists in the genesis of the 2020  ‘Clap for Carers’ ritual when, for 10 consecutive Thursday evenings, people ‘spontaneously’ stood on their doorsteps and applauded our healthcare staff – a powerful display of virtue and togetherness (aka ‘ego’ and ‘normative pressure’ nudges) to encourage us all to follow the government’s pandemic diktats.

Impromptu uprisings?

On the 31^st of July (two days after the Southport atrocity) multiple counterdemonstrations took place across the UK, purportedly to oppose the anticipated actions of ‘far right’ rioters. Were these counterdemonstrations organic, bottom-up displays of anti-fascist sentiments? I think not. Leaving aside the fact that the far-right threat turned out to be fabricated – the rioters failed to show – the synchronicity and homogeneity of the counterdemonstrations, with their professionally-made banners and identical chants, did not fit with a spontaneous uprising of ordinary people. These protests were clearly structured and well organised.

As evidenced in an earlier article, the UK government now possesses the communication infrastructure to psychologically manipulate its people in every realm of life. But sometimes our political elite can rely on non-government organisations, allied to the aims of global leaders, to do the direct shaping of public opinion. In the instance of the controlled reactions to the Southport stabbings, the Hope Not Hate group seems to be one such willing ally.  

Hope Not Hate: a charity or political movement?

According to its website, the Hope Not Hate organisation aspires to ‘work tirelessly to expose and oppose far-right extremism’ and to create ‘an alternative narrative of togetherness and unity’, this latter objective seeming to fit neatly with the government’s ‘controlled spontaneity’ initiative. Furthermore, their claim of being a ‘non-partisan’ group is rendered somewhat hollow by their collaboration with the Labour Party against George Galloway in Rochdale and Nigel Farage in Clacton during the recent general election.

The bulk of their funding (£790,000 in 2022) derives from their Hope Not Hate Charitable Trust. As a charity, this Trust is legally bound to pursue charitable goals for the public benefit rather than ‘furthering the interests of one political party’. A glance at the names of its six trustees evokes doubts about such impartiality, as this group of governors includes a Labour MP (Anna Turley), a Daily Mirror columnist (Ros Wynne-Jones), and an imam who was dismissed from his earlier role of government advisor on their ‘Anti-Muslim Hatred Working Group’ for spreading religious hatred (Quari Asim).

Global elites distrust humanity

It is highly plausible that the ‘anti far-right’ counterdemonstrations were orchestrated by our government in collaboration with non-governmental organisations, such as Hope Not Hate, who promote top-down authoritarian control of ordinary people. These technocratic – sometimes self-appointed - experts believe they know what’s good for us all, how we ‘should’ behave, and what’s for ‘the greater good’. One facet of this mindset is that our political elite no longer trust human beings to do the decent thing.

I, however, do hold the belief that the vast majority of human beings will respond sensitively and constructively to tragedies without the need for instruction and manipulation from above. The slaughter of children – as witnessed in the Southport stabbings – will always evoke authentic human displays of mourning and outrage, as well as stimulating mutual support and togetherness in the communities involved. Alas, our political elite, and their authoritarian bedfellows, no longer trust people to do the right thing, and never miss an opportunity to exploit a crisis to push their control agenda via information warfare and narrative manipulation.