SGUK Podcast 117 – 04/02/24


This podcast & accompanying article, will examine the definitions of hatred and how it manifests in group situations.  I wont be going into too much detail as we covered this in depth in Episode 4 in June 2021 and as usual in SGUK podcasts there is an accompanying article with each podcast.  I will post the link to the article and the original video podcast in the list of reference sources at the end of this document.

I explore herd mentality and whether or not we are programmed to behave this way. I discuss why people hate and what happens in our brains when we do. The differences and connections between love and hate.  I have done a small amount of research on crowd psychology, whether it be physically together, or via online platforms, and why and how people ‘fall or move’ into group decisions on what and how they post etc. I have previously explored the psychology of propaganda and how it an manifest itself in every day living, as opposed to times of wartime conflict.  Conflict is still present, and the intent to persuade groups of the population to believe and come to a preset conclusion is still at play in any society who are not immediately identified as being involved in a much wider game at play.

 All of this has been researched as a backdrop to the unknown phenomenon of this huge movement of hatred against Harry and Meghan (particularly Meghan) which has gone into such dark avenues, that almost 8 years down the line, enough has occurred where there is a growing bank of evidence of the mental health implications and the emerging trauma being experienced or exhibited in both perpetrators and victims, that will occupy psychologists and the various health services provision for decades.

I will give examples of groups that formed as a result of the coming together of Meghan and Harry, and how from the groups that have formed, the majority of them are consumed by an irrational level of hatred.  I have included Royal Reporters as a group, likewise TV media personalities, UK Government and its isolation policies, UK newspaper industry particularly the tabloids.  Because hatred is inferred and certainly offensive rhetoric is used in powerful groups at the top of the societal structure in the UK, the general population are increasingly behaving the same way, without fear of effective challenge.

We have previously touched on how negative practices becoming the norm in a modern society, ultimately reflect how negativity and lack of structure and ethics lead to an obvious break down in the economy of that society and nation.  People of the UK are currently living through many of those outcomes today, and the targets chosen by UK society top group for other groups to hate, are changing.  It is going to be a different story when more rabbits have a metaphorical gun. Those people who were corralled into corners in the past are and will continue to move out, and those who enjoyed their roles of oppressors will experience a different set of emotions for years to come.  A natural outcome of most societies where increasing numbers fell for the hype and ultimately began to experience what they had wished on others.

It is a very dangerous game to play but ultimately those who turned their backs on what was happening, together with those who benefit from such a state of affairs, start to wake up and realise that they too will become the oppressed if common sense and enlightenment do not take place.


The loss of life to victims of this behaviour must never be forgotten, and the growing implications for mental health and the lack of mental health provision to deal with a situation created by a divisive but loud minority, does not bode well.

Included in that discussion point,  the United Nations Definition of Incitement of Hatred.  Ongoing from that area of research, is the lack of challenge by national legal entities, which then begs the question what are the international legal organisations and bodies responsible for citizens on the receiving end of Human Rights Abuse.  Make no mistake all Hate Crime is abusive.

As per usual, I will cite examples of things done by one or more of the above groups, and the repercussions on the physical and/or mental health of Harry and Meghan and the wider implications about the role of the international community when a nation fails to act on such a serious matter.  With almost 8 years of ongoing activity in terms of bullying and harassment and the open hatred shown for a person of colour to enter the UK Monarchy by so many people, including the BRF itself, is both sad and very worrying for the treatment of POC in the UK and outside of it.

Every example I quote has academic research to support what I am saying or at the very least, there is ongoing research into one or more of the issues I raise in the podcast. Research undertaken by a number of professionals and institutions, including renowned Universities in a variety of countries, looking into the future implications of this area of work, and its impact on the societies to which these groups belong.


It is going to take a number of new approaches in terms of structure within health services, and content of programmes and of professional qualifications in the future.  It is going to require a re-examination of location and accessibility to such services when/if they appear in a town or region. Stigma has to be taken away from mental health service provision, and those involved in exacerbating the trauma being inflicted need to be addressed too.  The online community is a dangerous place for many, and at the moment, it is a voluntary code that exists with the owners of various social media platforms as to how much, if any, action is taken.

The cost to society is both in terms of health service provision as well as financial implications.  There is no pot of gold at the end of every case that presents, so as a society we need to look at doing things differently.

The use of the experience of Meghan and Harry can be used as a very useful contribution to research.  When we have national institutions in the Uk as one example, using terminology that is deemed offensive in terms of people of colour, and now has sunk so low to include descriptions of children who are not pure white, then as a nation we really are swimming in the toxic waste.  As a result, when other groups do the same, then the general population who harbour such views of POC feel comfortable to air those views, and in most cases, it goes without any real challenge.

Using an industry analogy, here is one way to explain what and how things can escalate. Everything that happens at shopfloor level occurs because it is accepted by the immediate supervisor or manager above.  This is replicated through the organisation, right through to the top.  The same management theory applies to a nation.  The type and volume of hate crimes (as we are discussing in this podcast) reflect what is going on at each level above.  We will always come back to the groups at the top of UK society. Eg  Government, Monarchy, Aristrocracy, UK media including Royal Reporters, police forces.  All of them are slow to react to hate speech, or incitement of hateful behaviour, often because they use the same words, or take part in some of the activity, and it is deemed acceptable as they know the other pillars at the top of UK will not challenge it.  All scratch the back of each other.

My views and I stand by them.  When those groups allow a couple and their children to be put at risk in terms of health and safety, and a growing number of tangible death threats, along with the keyboard warriors who openly post death threats on various forums, then I strongly believe that International Legal bodies need to step in.  If they don’t or can’t what is the use of any United Nations/International Forum? With the scope of various conflicts around the world right now, I believe that I am justified in asking questions about the usefulness of a number of International Legal bodies.

What is Deemed to be Hateful?

There is no international legal definition of hate speech and the characterisation of what is termed ‘hateful’ is controversial and disputed.  In terms of what the United Nations understand hate speech to be, and as outlined in their Strategy Plan of Action on Hate Speech, it states this as follows:-

  • Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent or other identify factor.

Why Do People Hate?

  • Hate is a feeling of hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger or a sense of injury.
  • It is extreme dislike or disgust.
  • Hatred is an emotion.
  • Extreme hatred can inspire violence.
  • Hatred is a feeling everyone has felt and experienced at some point, especially after betrayal or a hurt physically or emotionally by someone.
  • Feeling hatred over a long time, and holding on to hate can be detrimental to the mind and body.
  • Hatred changes the chemistry in the brain.
  • Hatred can trigger ‘aggression’ whilst feeling hateful to either defend or attack.
    • Flight or Fight responses are created and in turn increase two hormones cortisol and adrenaline.
    • These hormones can cause insomnia, anxiety and depression.
    • Can affect mental health.
    • Over time, stress hormones lead to inflammation throughout the body, resulting in significant health consequences.
    • The more intense the emotion, the more physically demanding it is to contain it. Leading for it to cause involuntary clenching of the jaw, grinding of the teeth and tensing the muscles.
  • The opposite of hate is not love. It is mental and emotional detachment.
    • Hatred creates an attachment to the thing or person hated the most.
    • Hatred is an intense repulsion.
    • Hatred falsely inflates the ego and makes one feel superior and self righteous against the person who is hated, which only results in more pain.

Herd Mentality

  • A natural desire to be part of the ‘in crowd’.
  • In the case of the Sussexes, this analogy of herd mentality, seems apt. The Queen Bee has left the UK and the swarm of hate has followed.
  • What is this herd mentality that is developing over a person that most will never meet but yet dominates their thought processes 24/7


Dr Michael Linden  (psychiatrist, based in the USA) derived the term Obsessive Hatred.

  • People become obsessed with what they see as injustice. They talk and think about nothing else.
  • Cases tend to be things in personal lives. eg divorcing or separating couples.  E.g. think of the analogy here of being the BRF, RRs, media and Royal supporters.  e., how they are dealing with the loss of one member of the Royal family to another continent, shaking what was deemed as solid ground for decades to come.  The transition from uk tax funded Royal to becoming a self financing global corporate giant in less than a year, shook the aforementioned groups to the core.  Their shock turned to anger, and for the last few years has grown to hatred of dangerous proportions, with death threats openly posted or implied on social media and in the UK tabloids, alongside safety measures for the Royals who changed continents to reduce the risk to their lives, to have to live with the fact that the Monarch removed all protection afforded to all Royals (working or not) but not the family forced to flee, and evicted them from their UK home given to them by the previous Monarch Queen Elizabeth III as a wedding gift. Yes the Monarch would rather lose a son and his family if it meant protecting the existence of a UK Monarchy for centuries to come. Only the next in line is considered essential to be protected, but anyone else is merely the Spare – ie expendable.The UK has sunk so low in that regard, it is not even news anymore. It is seen as normal rhetoric of the UK taxpayers expressing their opinion of a member of the Royal family, leaving the UK and taking his wife and children with him – a family that the loudest voices were quick to say, it did not matter as they were irrelevant and ultimately they will return to the fold due to lack of finance, therefore no way of sustaining themselves outside of the Royal bubble.
  • As most people have realised, the loud minority were projecting their own fears, and were in fact growing angrier by the day, that this member of the Royal family, could leave them in this state, not to mention how would the rest of the Royal family manage without the “irrelevant” couple.  The next fall back excuse for anger and annoyance was that the member of the Royal family should have stayed because it was and still is his “duty” to be there for his older brother who will become King one day.
  • In extreme cases of hatred, the urge for revenge can seem to be a psychosis.
  • In the workplace it tends to be dispute with bureaucracy, or a former partner denying them access to something, such as children. Egthink here of RRs,

In the USA psychiatrists are seeking to have post traumatic embitterment disorder recognised as mental illness. There have been a number of studies since 2011, and much discussion as to whether embitterment is a diagnosis or a psychological state.  I found a research paper, done at Royal Holloway University in London in 2017.  Here in the UK the NHS cites Chronic Embitterment as part of treatment programmes.

Dr Linden says that people with disorder are angry, pessimistic, aggressive, hopeless haters intent on revenge.

  • He points out that 1-2% of the population suffering with this all consuming bitterness, and says ‘they are almost treatment resistant’ Revenge is not a treatment.  Advised to walk away but many sufferers see walking away as defeat.

Compulsive Hatred Disorder is an offshoot of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and is one of the most dangerous.

A sufferer will respond to a perceived wrong as a lethal threat to their personal well being.

  • And will begin a process of incrementally exaggerating the magnitude of the perceived affront, or perceived affront until ‘they can justify to themselves the death of the object of their hatred’.
  • Whilst it is true that people suffering from CHD rarely go through with the extreme action; they have been proved to repeatedly try to encourage others to hate the individual/s to the same degree as them, and possibly respond with a physical manifestation of that hatred.

7 Stage Hate Model

Ref in  on 18/3/11


Stage 1 – The Haters Gather

“Not all insecure people are haters but all haters are insecure people”

  • Hate masks insecurities
  • Peer validation bolsters self worth
    • It also prevents introspection which reveals personal insecurities
    • Individuals who are otherwise ineffective become empowered when they join groups, which provide anonymity and diminished accountability.

Stage 2: The Hate Group Defines Itself

  • Identify through symbols, rituals (such as hand signals) think of the events of 6thJanuary 2021 and the storming of Capitol building.
  • Mythologies which enhance the member status and at the same time, degrade the object of their hate.
  • Extreme form is to give their life to the cause.

Stage 3: The Hate Group Disparages the Target

  • Hate is the glue that binds the haters to each other and to a common cause.
  • By verbally debasing the object of their hate, haters enhance their self esteem as well as their group status.
  • After verbal denigration, haters progress to the more acrimonious stage.

Stage 4: The Hate Group Taunts the Target

  • Hate by its nature, changes incrementally. Time cools the fire of hate and can lead to forcing the haters to look inwardly.
  • To avoid introspection, haters increase the rhetoric and violence, to maintain high levels of agitation. Taunts and offensive gestures serve the purpose. Racist graffiti can appear at this stage with some groups.

Stage 5: The Hate Group Attacks the Target with Weapons

  • This stage is critical. Differentiates the vocally abusive to physically aggressive .  eg prowling the turf.
  • Adrenalin increases – leads to provoking anger
  • Thoughts and actions leads to increased adrenalin.
  • Anger builds on anger.

Stage 6: The Hate Group Utilises Weapons

No reason to give details here on this podcast or article.  Everyone knows what that means.

Stage 7: The Hate Groups Destroys Target

  • The ultimate goal is to destroy the object of their hate
  • Mastery over life and death – gives the hater a sense of self worth and values. Qualities which haters lack.
  • The reality is that hate physically and psychologically destroys the Hater and the Hated.


The Author of the various reports on this model and its application is John R “Jack” Schafeer PhD. He is a behavioural analyst for the FBI and is the Author of “The Like Switch: An Ex FBI Agent’s Guide to Influencing, Attracting and Winning People Over.

I recommend you all look up:- Allport’s Scale of Prejudice and Discrimination.  It is a 5 Stage Model.


Stage 1 – Disparaging Terms

Stage 2 – Avoidance

Stage 3 – Discrimination

Stage 4 – Physical Attacks

Stage 5 – Execution


  • Allport outlines the process of how bias and prejudice evolve into discrimination and further into acts of violence.
  • Stereotypes – fall into the disparaging terms section.
    • By perpetuating stereotypes we help to foster an environment in which it is easier to discriminate.
    • Once members of a group overcome any objective to discriminate against another group, it becomes easier for members of that group to graduate to the next higher level.

The FBI uses the 7 Stage model, along with other tools, to describe how hate groups form, progress into prejudicial behaviour, before entering into violence.


Hate Speech – A Growing International Threat

A direct quote from a UN report published in January 2023.  Link to the report is listed in the Reference Sources at the end of the article.

“Hate speech is having a demonstrable effect on society: one of the many similarities between the January attacks on Brazil’s government buildings, and the storming of the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, is that each occurred after certain groups repeatedly directed dangerous rhetoric and false claims against others.

Concerns over the growing phenomenon have prompted independent human rights experts to call on major social media platforms to change their business models and become more accountable in the battle against rising hate speech online.”

“When in 2015  Yashica Dutt, publicly described herself as Dalit – a group of people who, according to those who subscribe to the Indian caste system, sit at the bottom of the pyramid – she became another victim of hate speech.

“I was very vocal. I was talking about what caste looks like and how we need to identify and acknowledge that it exists and no longer erase it. And obviously that narrative bothered a lot of people, so I have been a part of many troll attacks”.

The journalist and award-winning author of the memoir “Coming out as Dalit” says that caste exists within Indian societies, whether in the country itself, or the Indian diaspora. The rise of social media has, she says, led to racism, hate, and verbal assaults making an unwelcome comeback.

Her Tumblr blog, “Documents of Dalit discrimination”, is an effort to create a safe space to talk about the trauma of what it comes to be a lower-caste person, but she says she now faces hate speech every day on Twitter and Facebook.

“If I give a talk or have a panel discussion, there are always a few trolls,” she says. “I’m told that I’m being paid by a mysterious agency, rather than because I’m truly sick of the discrimination that I face and that people around me face.”

Hate speech “truly does have a heinous form online because you can mobilise armies of trolls to swarm on your account and make sure that you never use your voice again. And it’s quite scary,” she says.

According to Ms Dutt one prominent right-wing account incited its million or so followers to hurl abuses, slurs, and make threat of physical or sexual assault, and even death.

“I had to go offline for a long time. Even though I live in New York, a lot of the threats comes from India. And now we have the rise of fundamentalist Hindu communities in the US as well. It was scary, and over time I’ve learnt how to cope with it.”

“Consciously or subconsciously, this affects how we use our voice. Ultimately, you think if I tweet this in this particular way, what is going to be the consequence?”

Social Media and Hate

Social media host alarming degrees of hate messages directed at individuals and groups, threatening victims’ psychological and physical well-being. Traditional approaches to online hate often focus on perpetrators’ traits and their attitudes toward their targets. Such approaches neglect the social and interpersonal dynamics that social media afford by which individuals glean social approval from like-minded friends. A theory of online hate based on social approval suggests that individuals and collaborators generate hate messages to garner reward, for their antagonism toward mutually hated targets, by providing friendship and social support that enhances perpetrators’ well-being as it simultaneously deepens their prejudices. Recent research on a variety of related processes supports this view, including notions of moral grandstanding, political derision as fun, and peer support for interpersonal violence.

Hate Crime and Extremism

This direct quote is from a parliamentary report from the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. Title:- Hate Crime: Abuse, hate and extremism online.  14th Report of Session 2016-17  Printed 25th April 2017.  Link to the full Report listed at end of the article.

“Online hate, abuse and extremism

  • Scale of the problem
  • Stirring up hatred
  • Targeted abuse
  • Terrorism and Extremism
  • Advertising revenue derived from extremists videos
  • The responsibility to take action
  • Removal of illegal content

Real World Events Trigger Online Hate

A quote from an article in The Guardian published on 25 Jan 2023:-

“eal-world events such as murders and political protests can trigger an increase in online hate speech directed against seemingly unrelated groups. The finding could help online moderators better predict when hateful content is most likely to be published, and what they should be looking out for, researchers say.

Previous research has connected offline events to subsequent spikes in hate speech and violent hate crimes, but these studies have largely focused on moderated platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook (now Meta), which have policies to identify and remove this kind of content.

To better understand the triggers, and the relationship between mainstream platforms and less moderated ones, Prof Yonatan Lupu of George Washington University in Washington DC and his colleagues used a machine-learning tool to scrutinise conversations between users of 1,150 online hate communities published between June 2019 and December 2020. Some of these communities were on Facebook, Instagram and VKontakte. Others were on the less moderated platforms Gab, Telegram and 4Chan.”   Full report listed in the Reference Sources


Moderating Online Hate Content

“Quotation from the University of Oxford relating to recommendations about what could be done now, to help in this area.  It is all part of a Report, which is listed in the Reference Sources:- The ICCPR does not contain specific rules for online hate speech. But its general rules for prohibited speech under Article 20, limited speech under Article 19(3), and protected speech under Article 19(2) apply to the phenomenon and provide the baseline for its regulation by States and moderation by companies and other relevant stakeholders. Building on the interpretative guidance provided by the UN Human Rights Committee and the UN Special Rapporteurs on different topics, this Chapter recommends that States, companies and civil society organizations adapt Articles 19 and 20 of the ICCPR to the phenomenon of online hate speech. Specifically, States should enact legislation requiring public institutions and online platforms to adopt the necessary and 16 proportionate technical, remedial, and educational measures to counter different types of online hate speech – prohibited, limited and protected. To be sure, these do not exhaust the types of action needed to tackle online hate speech. Yet the interpretative framework and measures proposed in this Chapter can provide States, platforms, users, and civil society organizations with additional clarity over what needs to be done to counter online hate speech in line with Articles 19 and 20 of the ICCPR. Importantly, each of those stakeholders has a role to play in the design and implementation of a robust legal framework, effective remedies, and transparency mechanisms well-suited to moderate online hate speech in different fragile settings around the world.”


So, I ask the questions again:-

If it is good enough for the FBI, and renowned professionals in the field of researching and analysing the impact of hateful groups and the escalation processes that is integral to that structure, why and/or what is happening with law enforcement in the UK, USA and United Nations and subsidiaries in respect of the growth and structure of hate groups pursing individuals, sometimes over years, with the full aim of ending that life, and at the very least destroying that life?

I don’t need to state here again, what has been happening to Harry and Meghan since 2016, and neither of the countries appear to want to get involved.  Why?  What are international legal forums there to do, but to examine this wave of danger that is growing globally, and here we have one person who died in 1997, being chased and vilified by members of the UK BRF and its followers, and in turn new groups were formed and who joined in the herd mentality approach.  Now here we are since 2018, where Harry and Meghan are being put through the same hate model, and have the added weapon of online forums as well as online news publications.  Deaths have occurred, many more have mental health issues as a result of the pile on by the various herds, and here we are again, with the same hate models at play.  We now have the benefit of academic research and professionals in the field working with individuals who are at various points on this spectrum.

How many deaths are needed before someone takes notice?  What is the magic total that will trigger action?

For every paragraph I researched and every one that I included in this article, the same hate groups figure in each section in one way or another.  They are a minority but an intensely dangerous addition to the dangers some groups face in society from these hate groups springing up with apparent ease, because the various politicians in power, use the same rhetoric and in too many cases, have the same belief system.

Children and adults are at risk.  Harry and Meghan are one couple, but not the first in the UK Monarchy, and that on its own should be worthy of further investigation.

I will not stop whilst there is breath in my body, to seek a change in this divisive culture that is springing up around us.  All Sussex Squad are here to defend, and we will do so in a variety of ways.  One thing is for certain, our group is not built on hate, and as a result, most of the indicators do not apply to groups like ours, but we see every day, evidence of both of these models, in operation in the groups mentioned at the start of this podcast, and which includes keyboard warriors who claim to support the UK Monarchy.  That should be more than a red flag for the international legal community, as well as the USA as it is 4 of your citizens that are being hounded in this way.  You only have to read the sections on the effect of hatred on the body, (hatred destroys its host from the inside) and we all can identify members of the UK Monarchy and its Associates, who fit that criterion like a glove.

There is no need for either of those models to reach their final stage, because we have the knowledge already as to what is happening, and we have the academic research and evidence on the ground building.  It is beyond time to do something.  NOW.

The campaign by the Sussex Global UK podcast channel has been brought to the attention of a number of well known global academic institutions, along with research centres and highly skilled researchers and academics studying this phenomenon daily.  We contacted Elected Officials and Human Rights advocates operating in a wide range of nations around the world.  Legal advocates working at community level working with so many people who cannot afford to access the legal system the way it is set up at the moment.  We contacted organisations who work with children who are victims of hate campaigns, particularly online hate Technology which has enabled hatred to be delivered via a variety of mediums, from a variety of places in the world, aimed at targets who are based in another country – sometimes a whole continent away. Harassment and stalking are part of a collection of abusive activity reigned down on their targets, in a multitude of ways.  This activity is in breach of multiple areas of the Human Rights Act.

The situation seems to ignore those targets who have the means to escape from their abuser or abusers, and the fact that the abusers continue with a daily activity which is in breach of the law, helped by a powerful media group who believe that the law does not apply to them.  Encouraged by a government (here I am referring to the UK) who is opting out of some aspects of the legislation, and ignoring a number of others, and just going for broke, on their intended actions.  Respect for the law is at an all time low.  Even senior political elected officials are allowed to run for office in a number of countries, despite a number of concerns by local people of their nations legal framework. Those who have limited resources find it hard to achieve protection by the legal system, not least because it is set up to exclude increasing numbers of people.

Coercive Control and people who use it to try and control what their chosen target does in any given situation, do not only have to be ex partners.  It can be any person or group, who behave like an ex partner when their target manages to escape.  The abuser/s behave like they are the innocent party and that their target is the one who is behaving badly, when they do not respond to the myriad of calls for them to return to the place of abuse, for some spurious reason or another. There is a pool of evidence of a USA citizen being abused on UK soil for 3 years and it has continued on USA soil for years and counting.  Various Elected officials have been made aware of this fact, and not least because that particular state passed a Bill relative to Coercive Control and all residents of the State are covered if they are the victim.  To date, as far as I am aware, nothing has been done to stop this continual stream of abusive activity.  UK Media has continued with their abusive activity on behalf of others.

Just to remind you along with all the groups and individuals I mentioned earlier in the podcasts, there are a great many others who have been made aware of the Human Rights Campaign by this podcast channel.  This includes specialist global consultants who are called upon to give their expertise on the increasing scope of coercive control against this USA citizen.  I don’t need and will not be naming them.  All of them have been made aware of the others.  It is for them to communicate with each other and decide between themselves to publicise this situation for all who are suffering in this way.  The fact that one of the victims is a high profile figure which will attract peoples attention is a plus, because all victims in this need to be given attention, and the international law needs to be tweaked to reflect the use of technology to deliver the abuse in a variety of ways, across continents. The volunteers and I do not need to be involved or know details, but we will continue to keep raising the profile of this until something is done. A book is likely to be published later this year, based on the first 100 podcasts of the SGUK Channel, outlining areas of abuse, and the Hate for Hire business model used by media and social media platforms which is attracting paid individuals posting hate focussed on single purpose accounts.  Bot Sentinel features in our campaign and who has superb data on who and where this is all coming from.  Time for action is well overdue.  Most people affected do not have the funds to seek redress in the legal system.  Things need to change.

All people with the right to be protected under the law seems to be very much a phrase rather than a fact. I hope that state of affairs changes in my lifetime.

Ivy Barrow



Reference Sources


  • Stanford Human Rights Center Web:
    • Provides tools to conduct applied human rights research. Promote events, student engagement and public understanding of international human rights and global justice. Focus on public policy analysis and identification of best practice for students, advocates, states and civil society, to better understand how to respect and protect human rights.
  • University of Miami –
    • Scholars examine mob mentality – by Robert C Jones – 22 Jan 2021
  • University of Exeter: Herd Mentality – Are We Programmed to Make Bad Decisions? https://sciencedaily.com16th Dec 2014
  • Crowd Behaviour: Contagion, Convergence and Emergent Norm Theory.
  • Types of Collective Behaviour – Section 21.1
  • Propoganda – Psychology Wiki: Fandom Include section on Crowd psychology.
  • Blog Therapy : Hatred Why do people hate?
  • Misanthropy : = a general hatred, distort or contempt of human behaviour or human nature.
  • What Happens in the brain when we hate?
  • Criminal Code – re wilful promotion of hatred.
  • United Nations Incitement of Hatred Definition
  • OHCHR – Module 7: Incitement to hatred
  • Hate speech laws – by County.
  • Equality and Human Rights Commission.
    • Progress on Socio Economic Rights in Great Britain. Updte report on GB implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.  March 2018



  • Herd Mentality Image courtesy of:
  • Psychology of Hate Image courtesy of:-