"If they don't [vote], this will be the last election," said the richest man in the world and the owner of one of the world's largest platforms for political communication. The extreme rhetoric in current US politics reminds me of one of the best analyses of mobilizing propaganda: Horowitz's book, The Deadly Ethnic Riot (google.dk/books/edition/The_…). He writes: "...the expectation of aggressive behavior from the target group is properly viewed as a form of projection, the attribution of motives or emotions to others because of motives or emotions felt by one-self. (...) Rumors of agression following other precipitants enable action to proceed with confidence in its necessity." Rhetoric of this sort has shown itself to be tragically powerful throughout history. How powerful can it be when it is fuelled by extraordinary economic resources and unprecedented audience reach? It is key to emphasize that the rhetoric itself is clearly non-violent. As such, any effects will mainly be to mobilize Republicans to register and to vote. But our research also has shown that, among people with dominance-oriented mindsets, political threats are more likely to be met with violence: journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf…. Such mindsets have been predictors of Trump support in prior elections: journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf… My concern - as an outside European professor with expertise in political violence - is whether and how rhetoric of this kind will help justify electoral violence during the US election and increase the risk of it happening.

Så er program-puslespillet for ugens Folkemøde lagt. Jeg beklager på forhånd, hvis jeg kommer til at se lidt forpustet ud!