Группа авторов

The Radical Right During Crisis


Скачать книгу

right to bear arms13 and First Amendment14 freedom of assembly.15 Although spokespersons had called for a ban on large assemblies16 in previous articles, the act of prolonged government intervention appeared to spark intense backlash.

      Oath Keeper spokespersons noted a seeming prioritization of “globalist” aims over national freedoms in intervention efforts, pointing to an early hesitation to close international air traffic but a speedy move towards domestic lock-down.

      At the onset of COVID-19, the perceived conspiracy revolved around deep-state officials downplaying the virus, encouraging Trump not to take direct action. Over time, however, the conspiracy evolved into profound overreach, accusing globalists of using the virus as a means to strip individuals of their liberty. Interestingly, Trump was not blamed directly for this overreach; rather, Oath Keeper officials queried why Trump was allowing the globalists to continue to surround him especially when his own base was against it.

      Overall, Oath Keeper leadership’s understanding of the COVID-19 crisis morphed from a purposeful inaction by elites to their capitalization on the crisis by taking away personal liberties, gun rights, painting Trump in a negative light, and benefitting economically.

      Past the peak: where do we go from here?

      By mid-April 2020 public messaging by the Oath Keepers became a call for followers to fight back against perceived government intrusion. Although spokespersons were not arguing that the virus did not exist, they repeated Trump’s statement about the cure being worse than the virus, viewing the situation as the deep state making inroads in taking over individual liberty.

      

      

      Moreover, they disparaged local actors who implemented lockdown orders as puppets for globalist elites.

      While this is in line with anti-government ideology overall, it is curiously pro-Trump. That is, when Trump did not act strongly enough in the face of COVID-19, this was perceived not as his inadequacy but rather as a complot by deep-state actors feeding him bad information about the virus’s banality. Similarly, when Trump supported increased government regulation (maligned by Oath Keepers) this was again not due to Trump’s mal intent but rather yet another deep-state plot to strip individuals of personal freedoms.

      Although Trump is not blamed per se there are calls for him to intercede on behalf of citizens by removing the “deep-state elites” and changing the regulations he “let happen”—a passive framing as opposed to was actively seen as creating.

      

      In the face of changing “facts”, the narrative remains consistent

      Jaclyn Fox is a Doctoral Fellow at CARR and doctoral candidate in international relations at American University, Washington, D.C.