We cannot ignore what is going on with Restore

I am watching extremists being groomed in real time. We need to be sanguine about where this could take us

A friend with whom I had cordial relations until very recently, has increasingly been sending unsolicited messages, increasing in the tone of madness.

Of course it’s about Restore Britain.

It is a pattern repeating across the internet.

Rather than being able to react to political discourse or the presentation of facts with anything resembling pragmatism, they lash out feverishly, linguistically violently, with extreme emotion and something akin to desperation.

We have seen this sort of hysteria on the extreme left, with shrieking banshees crying about genocide or burning planets or Black Lives. We even had histrionics from middle aged middle class British people sobbing about the UK leaving a supranational entity during Brexit, as if the UK’s departure was so catastrophic and evil that utter desolation would ensue.

But the development of febrile, irrationality and cultish sycophancy is a rather new phenomenon of the emerging ‘Woke Right’.

It will not end well.

Having worked on the Kenyan election campaign of 2016-17 as a communications strategist with the primary aim of calming tribal tensions to try to steer the country away from violent unrest, as had been seen in 2007, I know the warning signs. I had to.

The problem is, most people in the UK do not. They have likely never personally experienced the build up to potential civil war. Certainly not Restore Britain supporters who are all native Brits.

People are underestimating what lies ahead if Restore Britain and their deeply troubled support base continue to whip up an ever increasing frenzy, but never see their demands realised. Because let’s be serious, there will not be millions of mass deportations of entire communities, the struggle that even a confident and strong Government would face politically, legally and logistically mean the boil won’t be burst soon enough for Restore supporters.

What is clear is the phenomenon of both Far Left and Right irrational radicalism finds its provenance entirely on the psychology of social media.

For most of human history, the ability to influence large populations was limited by geography, literacy and technology. Today, a message can reach millions of people within hours. Combined with sophisticated algorithms, emotionally charged content and coordinated online influence campaigns, social media has become the most powerful tool for shaping public opinion ever created.

The danger is not simply misinformation. It is the manipulation of human emotion itself.

Modern psychological operations no longer require leaflets to be dropped from aircraft or state-controlled newspapers. They can be conducted through anonymous accounts, coordinated networks, foreign influence campaigns, algorithmic amplification and increasingly sophisticated AI-generated content. Concerns over hostile foreign actors, bot farms and coordinated online manipulation have become a recurring feature of discussions surrounding the health of British democracy and society.

This is of course not a uniquely British problem. But our crisis is certainly one garnering attention overseas. Particularly the phenomenon that is Restore Britain. An entirely social media tethered operation. But it is the potency of the doom-prepper-esque rabid devotion of the followers, wholly consumed by the dopamine dousing, smoke and mirror wormholes online that frightens me. These people are primed to believe anything.

People rarely change their beliefs because of facts alone. In fact, studies show that this happens almost never. Astonishing really.

They only often change course due to challenges to a sense of identity, belonging, fear, anger, hope and perceived threats. Social media platforms are designed to maximise engagement, and that engagement is driven by emotion. Content that provokes outrage, fear or tribal loyalty travels further than calm analysis. Over time, this creates a feedback loop. Users are shown more of what excites them. Stronger rhetoric as the user becomes increasingly desensitised. Extreme emotional investment exhibited publicly. The risk of humiliation if they are seen to be admitting to a mistake. Communities then form around perceived shared grievances. Opponents are portrayed not as people with different opinions, but enemies, traitors and existential threats. Nuance disappears. Certainty grows. The ability to back out gets smaller and smaller.

Human psychology makes us susceptible, and what were once psy-ops conducted by intelligence agencies - emotional manipulation, narrative control and in-group reinforcement - are now the modus operandi of social media platforms.

In this environment, political movements can develop characteristics that resemble highly emotional social movements. Supporters become deeply invested not only in a set of policies but in a collective identity. Criticism of the movement is perceived as an attack on the group itself. Loyalty becomes a virtue; dissent becomes betrayal.

Evolutionary wiring dictates in-group loyalty and threat detection, and Restore Britain’s sophisticated operation (despite how oafish it might appear) knows how to play directly in to that. Supporters often exhibit histrionics: exaggerated outrage, apocalyptic rhetoric and performative patriotism. Confirmation bias and the availability heuristic then amplifies this further creating a feedback loop where anger feels like action.

Just a quick glance of online support for Restore reveals a cultish consumption of the movement. Members flood comment sections with conspiracy-laden accusations, ritualistic repetition of slogans and virulent shaming and ostracisation of dissenters, which in itself triggers dangerous social contagion.

Many Restore supporters are ordinary men and women. But fail to act that way online. The coercion tactics being used on Restore supporters mirror rather ghoulishly Russia’s Internet Research Agency or China’s United Front: Histrionics, death threats to critics, conspiracy spirals and binaries such as “Save Britain or perish”. Manipulation through loaded language, dehumanisation, repetition across synchronised accounts and moral panic escalation, where everything points to systemic betrayal.

These lay the groundwork for real world mass unrest. Online immersion accelerates identity fusion, with young men in particular drawn to assertive masculinity and the warrior ethos.

History shows that this phenomenon is far from new. Technologies change, but psychological mechanisms remain consistent.

During the French Revolution, fear, grievance and propaganda helped transform legitimate demands for reform into periods of political violence and mass executions. In Weimar Germany, economic anxiety, humiliation and relentless propaganda were weaponised to create a political movement that convinced millions that extraordinary measures were necessary for national survival. In Rwanda, radio broadcasts repeatedly dehumanised political opponents until mass violence became possible. In the former Yugoslavia, media narratives intensified ethnic divisions and helped create the conditions for conflict.

These examples share common ingredients: perceived crisis, emotional mobilisation, tribal identity, information manipulation, and the erosion of trust in institutions.

But the process never begins with violence. It begins with narratives.

It begins with the belief that only one group possesses the truth. That opponents are not merely mistaken but dangerous. That democratic processes are incapable of solving society’s problems. That extraordinary circumstances justify extraordinary actions.

The problem with Restore is it is extremely unlikely that online support with turn into significant real world political support, let alone governance. So the democratic process would be deemed incapable. Yet so many of their supporters already exhibit a fanaticism leading to delusion; many genuinely believe they can win a General Election. It might be easy to laugh at such naked faith, but it is dangerous. It is the mental stance of whatever they want to be true, is true, and however much evidence stacks against them, it is all conspiracy. Alarming levels of delusion often lead to irrational, extreme actions.

Most people who become involved in highly polarised political movements do not see themselves as extremists. They see themselves as defenders of a community, their values or their aims.

Trust in institutions has declined across much of the Western world. At the same time, foreign influence operations, disinformation campaigns and algorithmic amplification make it easier than ever to inflame tensions and deepen divisions.

Political opponents become enemies. Conspiracy theories become mainstream. Protests become more confrontational. Counter-protests emerge. Trust continues to erode. Each side becomes convinced that the other represents an existential threat.

In such an environment, a black swan event—a terrorist attack, economic crisis, political scandal or terrible incident—can rapidly transform online anger into real-world uprising.

Social media did not create the vulnerabilities. Humans have always been susceptible to tribalism, fear and manipulation. What social media has done is accelerate and industrialise processes on a scale that previous generations could scarcely imagine.

The lesson from history is not that every passionate political movement becomes dangerous. Most do not.

The lesson is that democracies remain healthy only when citizens retain the ability to question their own side, resist emotional manipulation and recognise the humanity of those with whom they disagree.