Mallet Politics

Where traditional ‘wedge politics’ is an attempt to sharply split a political grouping, the blunt instrument of ‘mallet politics’ instead attempts to crush moderate critics into perceived nonexistence.

A right-wing to left-wing spectrum is used to illustrate concepts in this article. This is naturally an oversimplification, and I think the left-right political spectrum is not a good model to explain contemporary politics. However, the left-right spectrum, and associated terms, are widely used among media, academics, and commentators to frame issues and manage perceptions. Since I will argue that the ’mallet politics’ tactic is primarily used to manage perceptions it is important to discuss the perceptions, even when (and especially when) those perceptions do not match reality.

The terms “wedge politics” or “wedge issues” have been used describe a political tactic when people , typically supporters of a political party, are deliberately split using a contentious issue. Often the tactic is used against an opponent’s political supporters to split the vote and potentially bring supporters over to support another party¹.

Another potential use of wedge politics, would be a political party targeting its own supporters to cut away the more extreme supporters who have problematic behaviour which risk offending the more moderate potential supporters. A contemporary right-wing party might drive a wedge between the larger numbers supporters who have concerns about immigration and a much smaller group who are overtly racist, marching around while branded with fascist symbols. Similarly, a contemporary left-wing party might try to drive a wedge between a large group of supporters who want a generous welfare state and a fringe group who want to abolish all private property. These would be a rational approaches from political parties seeking to gain more moderate supporters by distancing the party from concerning fringe elements.

Where wedge politics is a sharp, targeted approach to split a group of voters, I am using the term ‘mallet politics’ to describe a blunt instrument tactic which represents attempts to crush moderate critics and creates more political extremism, both perceived and actual.

I doubt the term ‘mallet politics’ has been commonly used within the corridors of power, or if it is neatly defined as a tactic by those that use it. However, a trend is seen in the behaviour of centrist media and politicians. Judging true intent is often difficult as we do not know what is going on in the minds of others. I am sure that there is some element of people going along with the norms of the group when many in politics and media engage in what I am calling mallet politics. However, the extent, cunning, and intensity seen from some who apply mallet politics indicates that it is often an intentional tactic at some level.

In recent years, the use of mallet politics is more clearly seen applied to the right-wing where expressing moderate views and fairly common values will often see people and groups labelled as far right. Slight criticism of policies from the perceived political centre is often met with critics being smeared as far right, or Nazis, or fascists.

The centrist media, centrist politicians, and centrist bureaucrats create the perception of a political no-man’s-land where moderate right-wing critics were once were seen and acknowledged. In my diagrams, this no-man’s-land is the crush zone from the application of the metaphorical mallet. To the political centrist, creating the perception that most critics are “far right” extremist has a number of short-term advantages.

First, potential critics of the centrists and their policies are deterred with the threat of political and social exile to the margins. The associated loss of status and damage to career prospects appears enough to encourage conformity in some cases. This deterrent appears more effective when applied to the professional managerial classes.

Second, the Overton window² of politically acceptable views is greatly narrowed so that even extreme and unpopular centrist policies become promoted as the only acceptable option³.

Third, creating a perception of a growing far right threat creates villains to justify more restrictive policies and potentially more paid work for those who claim to be countering extremism.

In the longer-term with criticism suppressed and critics discredited, the centrist are likely to become more insular, more extreme, more intolerant to differing viewpoints, and in-turn develop more dysfunctional policies. If the centrists start genuinely believing their own propaganda, then a paranoid worldview could develop where they see other people who value “free speech” and “families” as adopting far-right ideologies⁴. As mallet politics is used to manipulate perception, the actual reality is that moderate right-wingers still greatly outnumber any actual far right extremists. Distrust in centrist media and centrist institutions is likely to grow in such situations, especially as the gulf widens between actual reality and what the talking heads on television keep telling people is reality.

Seeing the clear application of mallet politics to the moderate left is complicated by the current situation where people traditionally on the moderate left in politics also find themselves smeared directly or indirectly as far right extremists. Such smears are often directed at those criticising COVID-19 policies or intersectional identity politics, leaving many puzzled about how their new political label is justified. The media’s campaign against the former UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn could be an example of the application of mallet politics against the moderate left. Article⁵, after article⁶ after article⁷ portrayed Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters as dangerous, far left extremists for what traditionally would be considered fairly-moderate, left-wing views and policies. Regardless of your views on Corbyn or his policies, the smear campaign against him was intense and sustained.

The operational and ideological relationships between the extreme centrists and the extremists on the far right and far left is both interesting and murky. Providing more media coverage of the far right and far left, could serve to make centrists look better in comparison to the public. In-depth media coverage of more moderate critics may increase public awareness of viable alternatives, so could be seen as a credible political threat to the centrist institutions. Their is much speculation about how much of the far right and far left activities (especially violent activities from Antifa-types and neo-Nazi-types⁸) are genuine and how much is heavily influenced by agent provocateurs, undercover agents for authorities, media manipulation, and/or hirelings.

How many of the pantomime villains on the far left and far right are actually serving the interests of the centrists?

The use of mallet politics and censorship activity to create the perception of a no-man’s land, could drive moderate critics out of the mainstream into fringe online and offline communities. In such communities they are believed (by the “Experts”) to encounter violent activists with genocidal views and are then radicalised⁹. Such radicalisation, if it occurs, could be the intentional or unintentional result of centrist policies to suppress dissent. From my observations, I see large numbers of moderate people opposing the policies of centrist governments without a noticeable increase in people getting swastika tattoos.

Arguments are often made across the left-right political spectrum that a government ( or society as a whole) is becoming far left or far right. Such arguments often seek to explain why viewpoints which were considered acceptable and mainstream to the centrists a few decades ago are now considered extremism.I would argue that instead of large rightward or leftward shifts of the political centre, we are seeing situations where the centrists will selectively transplant certain ideologies from the far right or far left directly into centrist institutions when it is politically convenient and serves a purpose. How many of the individuals in centrist institutions genuinely believe that “transwomen are women”¹⁰ or that invading Iraq was a “crusade” led by President George W Bush as a “messenger from God”¹¹? Whether it is done simply to appease a group of highly-motivated voters in order to maintain power (or done in service of other agendas), the postmodern centrists will occasionally adopt fringe ideas, transplant them into the corridors of power, then expect those within centrist institutions to affirm this new normal.

Hopefully the concept of mallet politics provides some explanatory value in understanding contemporary politics. Naming a tactic is one step towards effectively countering a tactic. In the next article we will look deeper into “extreme centrism” and its implications.

Footnotes

1 Jonah Goldberg, 2022, Column: Could wedge issues be the cure for polarized politics?,Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-04-05/wedge-issues-polarization-politics-democrats-republicans

2 A Brief Explanation of the Overton Window, https://www.mackinac.org/OvertonWindow

3 Juliette Legendre,Macron’s Extreme Centrism: Democratic Threat, Lobe Log, https://lobelog.com/macrons-extreme-centrism-democratic-threat/

4 thedisinfoproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2021-11-09-FINAL-working-paper-disinformation..pdf

5 Nick Cohen, 2018, How Britain’s far left ‘sympathises’ with the worst of our prejudices, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/05/how-britains-far-left-sympathises-with-the-worst-of-our-prejudices

6 James Kirchick, 2018, Britain’s most dangerous export: Corbynism,Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/jeremy-corbyn-left-uk-europe-britains-most-dangerous-export-corbynism/

7 Rowena Mason, 2021, Labour votes to ban four far-left factions that supported Corbyn’s leadership, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/20/labour-votes-to-ban-four-far-left-factions-that-supported-corbyns-leadership

8 https://thedisinfoproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/The-murmuration-of-information-disorders-May-2022-Report-FULL-VERSION.pdf

9 https://thedisinfoproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/The-murmuration-of-information-disorders-May-2022-Report-FULL-VERSION.pdf

10 https://www.broadbean.com/uk/resources/blog/latest-news/trans-women-are-women-removing-bias-from-your-hr-strategy/

https://unherd.com/2023/02/the-problem-with-trans-women-are-women/

11 Ron Suskind, 2004, Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush, The New York Times, https://web.archive.org/web/20160203071033/https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/faith-certainty-and-the-presidency-of-george-w-bush.html