How are civil society groups quietly working to prevent election-related violence?

Uncertainty remains high in nearly every aspect of the presidential race as Election Day approaches. Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Harris continue to poll closely in swing states. There have been two assassination attempts on Trump. But many researchers and conflict mitigation practitioners worry that the possibility of political violence in the coming weeks and months may be more certain than any recent election.

“Every number has gone up, from hate crimes to political murders to people driving into protesters,” said Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “If this is a form of political violence, it has been increasing since 2015.”

In February, Kleinfeld invited nearly 100 people to discuss trends and consider the future, considering the possibility of violence during, during and after the election. In addition to academics, the group also included civil society groups focusing on democracy and reducing violence. Kleinfeld said this was an unprecedented practice.

“Even when the elections were really close, like Gore versus Bush in 2000, there was no scenario planning for violence at election time,” he said. “It’s very different this time.”

NPR spoke with more than a dozen people like Kleinfeld who are involved in this type of scenario planning. All work outside government and law enforcement, but have been involved in efforts aimed at reducing polarizing campaigns that might otherwise turn violent. While concerns remain high, many say violence is not inevitable and ordinary people can play an important role in easing tensions.

Experts worried about state and local political violence

Worrying scenarios the organizations are planning include Trump losing again and refusing to concede. But few believe there will be a repeat of the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. Instead, many say there may be organized efforts to interfere with state certification processes or local vote counting efforts.

“It may be more prevalent in many parts of the country, and that increases the threat in many ways,” said Pete Simi, a professor of sociology at Chapman University.

Common Defense, a national, progressive grassroots organization of 40,000 veterans, is readying its network to respond to places where such crises might arise. It brings together Quick Reaction Forces, or QRFs, who will appear unarmed and in civilian clothes.

“We’re educating a lot of people about de-escalation,” said Perry O’Brien, co-founder of Common Defense. “We educate people about watching and recording video for accountability.”

In addition, O’Brien said the organization trains its members to gather open-source intelligence (publicly available information, often posted on social media sites) to monitor extremist activity in swing states around the constituency.

“Quite frankly, that’s the area where we anticipate most of these threats will come from,” he said.

The consensus among experts is that political violence in the United States will not only become more widespread in location but also more diverse in potential targets. Increasing polarization has deepened the divide between “left” and “right” so much that even people and organizations working in the field of human services are having to think about security.

“This includes the LGBTQ community, this includes anyone who advocates for minorities and advocates for immigrant rights,” said David Neiwert, a journalist who has long documented the far right. “These people will also be the target of various acts of domestic terrorism.”

These dynamics were already evident, with many pointing to the controversy in Springfield, Ohio, as a case study. There, right-wing social media accounts and Trump’s campaign inflamed local tensions by amplifying lies about Haitian immigrants. The attention frenzy has created fear among residents, bringing with it dozens of bomb threats and white nationalist groups that have used the controversy to spread propaganda and recruit more members.

Building local resilience

Many nonprofits have quietly worked over the past five years to help small communities avoid scenarios like the one unfolding in Springfield. Some have decades of experience in other countries where polarization has led to civil war. The application of these practices to the US context is novel.

“We often look at how we can have non-securitized responses, that is, how we can respond as civil society, as people outside of the police or the National Guard,” said Nealin Parker, executive director of Common Ground USA. His organization, launched after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, is a U.S.-focused part of the global peacebuilding organization Search for Common Ground.

Parker said he is particularly concerned about the period after Election Day, when the outcome of the race may still be uncertain.

“This is a time of uncertainty and toxic polarization,” Parker said. “So there’s work we’re doing right now to help equip influencers from many different ideologies and communities to be able to take back their message of ‘here’s what we understand, here’s what happened in the election.’ ”

Parker talks about “influencers” who are not of the social media variety. Instead, his organization cultivates relationships with stakeholders across the country, especially in swing states, who deserve local respect. He said his goal is to provide them with early warning of polarizing false and disinformation narratives that may be formulated to divide their communities, and to support them in getting better information and rejecting false claims.

“Once again, if you do things that lead to depolarization ahead of time and work with influencers where they can get clear information from reliable sources early enough, then you can create in-group influence,” Parker said. “You can share this information with communities in ways that will keep them safe and reduce tensions.”

Parker said these partners come from many sectors, including faith, business, government and athletics. They also cross political, ideological and religious lines. That’s why many choose not to disclose their involvement in these efforts, he said. This could damage their credibility with voters.

Loading…

Building peace in the long term

The focus on elections has increased public awareness of political violence, but many people working to alleviate the problem say they are just as concerned about the long term.

“Extremism is getting worse with both election results,” said Common Defense’s O’Brien. “It will be critically important to continue to develop the mobilization infrastructure that can protect communities from direct threats, whether election-related or not.”

This is one of the reasons why Jill Garvey recently founded States at the Core (STAC), which supports communities responding to authoritarianism. His organization has worked closely with communities that have had to navigate a response, such as in Nashville, Tenn. coordinated white nationalist activity.

“There is a need for rapid response support in times of crisis. There is also a need for more capacity at the local level,” Garvey said. “Local communities will be the cornerstone of fending off authoritarianism.”

Garvey said one of the challenges is systematic attacks on the “social infrastructure” that has historically helped hold communities together. Garvey said spaces like schools and libraries provide venues for dialogue.

“I think that’s why you see authoritarian movements going after libraries, schools, YMCAs,” Garvey said. “Because when they close or build these places… make them places where people don’t want to participate, I think communities have a much harder time finding middle ground on a lot of issues, and you see a lot of that. There is more polarization.”

However, organizations invested in the project of polarizing America face funding difficulties.

“Compare, for example, the country of Germany and the investments they have made to prevent radicalisation. More than 1 billion dollars were invested “We’re going to spend a three-year period trying to solve this problem,” Parker said, “whereas we don’t have anything remotely comparable in the United States.”

Some private foundations have begun to step into this gap. Democracy Fund president Joe Goldman said they give money to organizations working on political violence in university settings or trying to increase community resilience. Some needed money for digital and even physical security.

“We’re trying to make sure they have the supports that make them feel as safe as they can,” she said.

But many philanthropists working in this field did not speak on the record to NPR. There are concerns that Republicans will step up their activities if Trump wins Targets non-governmental organizations They carried out pro-democracy work. However, the urgency of the moment has led to some increase in the resources of the philanthropic sector.

“We’ve certainly seen a significant increase over the last decade; 50% more resources being poured into the democracy space,” said Joe Goldman, president of the Democracy Fund. “This still represents a small portion, less than 1% of overall philanthropic giving… But we have certainly seen a lot of new philanthropists coming into this space and voicing concerns about the health of our democracy and the integrity of our government. Political system.”

For those who see all the lights flashing red as the election approaches, there is also agreement that the future is not predetermined. Many say it’s important to remind Americans that everyone has agency to help overcome deep division.

“Most of the interactions that most people in this country will have over the next month will not be with radicalized people,” Parker said. “They’re with people you can step away from the abyss with, and to do that you have to engage in these conversations.”

Copyright 2024 NPR