Scarcity of Extremists Incentivizes Smears

When credible instances of the harm an advocacy sector is organized to fight become rare, organizations and their funders face pressure to identify or exaggerate new threats. That incentive can produce false positives, reputational capture, and perverse coordination between watchdogs and the groups they purport to oppose, with consequences for donations, media coverage, and law enforcement priorities. — This frames a systemic explanation for why anti‑extremism labeling can become politicized and suggests institutional reforms (transparency, auditing, prosecutorial scrutiny) to restore credibility.