I created an internet troll. And he showed me just how polarised politics has become.

The internet is everywhere. Everyone is constantly bombarded by information, fake and real. It’s possible to opt out, but doing so has practical consequences. Opinions are polarising, fuelled by selective filtering of information. As opposed to real life, social media has weak institutions: it is anonymous, hard to control, and miscreants rarely risk physical or legal harm.

“Troll Farms” in Russia most likely shaped the 2016 US election, and in China trolling is part of the state apparatus. It’s a similar case with Brexit and Vote Leave. Trolls establish emotional connections with voters, assuming they’re not so interested in facts. Picking high-profile battles on Twitter raises an actor’s profile and provides free publicity.

A more extreme post is more likely to be shared, helping to establish a policy in voters’ minds. Social media makes meaningful in-person interactions rarer, but online “friends” can be made instantly by even the most socially awkward of people. Online “communities” form, and within their bubbles feel reaffirmation of their views, even if they’re far detached from logic, common sense or sanity, and breeding extremism. With this in mind I conducted an experiment.

I set up a fake Twitter profile. He was an unpleasant man, fitting the description of “Gammon”, a derogatory term for extreme white Brexiteers. His postings would be fallacious, offensive and ridiculous. I ironically named him Jeffrey, a name the Urban Dictionary calls “the coolest person you’ll ever meet”. For his surname I chose an obscure word from an obscure European language meaning “anything”. His profile picture was the North Downs and his interests included bird watching, cycling and corned beef, as well as his love for England and Brexit: enough to appear credible.

For the first 24 hours he made several inflammatory posts. His big idea was to build a wall in the Channel paid for by an illusory Brexit windfall. He posted a petition to bring back workhouses for homeless immigrants, debtors and remoaners, and even suggested a wall around Surrey. He gained more followers in a day than my real Twitter profile had acquired in four years of normal posts. After waking up in a cold sweat I deleted him, only to be asked to write this article after which, in horror movie style, Jeff rose from the grave.

Upon rebirth, he became more extreme. New policies included internment camps for remainers, return of the death penalty, all EU immigrants out of the country on March 30th and micro-chipping of remaining EU citizens (all earning over £80k and excluded from the NHS) for “security” reasons. His New Year’s resolutions included not speaking to foreigners, staying in Surrey, and only shopping in 100% English businesses. He now got more likes and followers. Despite trolling across all media, nobody called him out as fake and real people engaged. Someone called him a “bell-end”, but he was a fellow troll.

One of Jeff’s high-profile followers a Conservative MEP who recently suggested that the UK treason laws be updated to apply to citizens “working undemocratically against the UK through extreme EU loyalty”. I could imagine this coming from Nick Griffin and the BNP ten years ago, but coming from a representative of our current government it shows how the goalposts have shifted, with once unacceptable views now becoming mainstream. Other followers were a motley assortment of mainly English, semi-literate Europhobes, some Trumpites and an Israeli deviant who mainly posted porn, plus an Australian professor studying populism. A Kent-based councilor and founder of a UKIP spin-off party with over 50,000 followers also followed Jeff. Several publicly stated they would block anyone with different opinions.

Within this ‘Social Media Bubble’, perception of reality was distorted. Surveys, extreme views and fake news constantly entered Jeff’s newsfeed, reaffirming his extremist agenda and views. “Respect Brexit” posted a survey of ideal Brexit scenarios. Out of a 2514 person sample, 89% was “leave no deal”, 3% was “withdrawal agreement”, 6% “remain” and 2% “people’s vote”. “Conscript Remainers into the EU Army” asked the question whether the Prime Minister committed treason by signing the UN migration pact, and 93% of the 2471 voters within this particular bubble answered in the affirmative. Thoroughly unrepresentative of the whole, but gospel to those trapped in this context.

This begs a question. Within the establishment, what guides our leaders? Do the Conservative right and Labour left perceive a similarly distorted version of reality, powered by their own informational bubbles? Does this lead to them creating and reaffirming policies that make no objective sense and make the individuals and communities they supposedly represent poorer? Have they been trolled, or are they themselves the troll? When Boris spouts “better off under WTO” or Theresa repeats “taking back control”, do they get the troll’s rush of selfish excitement at the reactions? Alternatively are they reaffirming what their media interactions have now made them believe to be true and representative, dutifully enacting the “will of the bubble”? Have the likes of Jeff helped shape the current crisis? Probably. For that he apologises and will now fall on his sword. The likes of Johnson, May and Corbyn may well have more in common with this angry madman than they would like to acknowledge. Maybe it’s time they owed us all an apology too.