The UK has seen regular mass demonstrations since Israel began its campaign against Palestine – a campaign which is being investigated for the crime of genocide. Given the continued pressure exerted by these protests, the Tory government – namely Michael Gove – has two options. Stop financially and politically supporting the Israeli government in its crusade against the Palestinians. OR, try to convince the public that actually the people protesting against the violence are the extremists via an ‘extremism definition’.
Can you guess which option the Tories have chosen?
The problem is that the approach is already a source of ridicule – and one which is seemingly doomed to failure:
That’s the Tories buggered then.
“The proposed new definition of extremism says “core behaviours” that could constitute extremism include attempts to “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups” pic.twitter.com/AKSqLkhcwQ
— Clive Lewis MP (@labourlewis) March 9, 2024
Extremism definition: legally dubious – politically ridiculous
Regarding the government’s push to redefine extremism, the Observer reported on 9 March:
Michael Gove is set to announce a controversial plan this week to ban individuals and groups who “undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy” from public life, despite fears inside government that the scheme is at risk of a legal challenge, leaked documents reveal. …
Organisations and individuals that breach a new official definition of extremism will be excluded from meetings or any engagement with ministers, senior civil servants, government advisory boards and funding.
Councils will be expected to follow the government’s lead, cutting any financial ties or support to individuals or groups that have been categorised as extremist. …
In internal briefing papers, Gove’s officials admit there is a risk of a legal challenge. Gove already faces strong opposition to the plans, including from civil liberties groups, officials and some senior Tory MPs.
The Guardian previously reported that the proposals weren’t popular within the party as they’d potentially target many right-wing activist groups:
The rightwing Tory MP Miriam Cates and Lord Frost, the high-profile rightwing peer, are among those who have expressed opposition amid concerns that the move could have an inadvertent impact on anti-abortion groups, advocates for socially conservative causes and those opposed to transgender rights.
“Any attempt to define extremism or fundamental British values is very risky because one person’s extremism is another person’s sincerely held and lawful belief,” Cates told the Guardian.
“An obvious is example is where I regularly call trans rights activists extremists for believing a man can be a woman just because he says he is, and that this gives him the right to enter women-only spaces, but equally I am called an extremist for believing there are only two biological sexes and that you can’t change sex.”
“These are debates that we should be able to have lawfully in society. We should be able to call each other extremists, but it also means those views should not be banned,” said the MP, one of the leaders of the New Conservatives grouping of Tory MPs.
Who extremes the extremists?
Many online have highlighted the impossibility of creating a definition which would work:
It’s going to be very hard to find a new definition of “extremism” that does not risk branding legitimate organisations & individuals as extremists & suppressing #FreedomOfSpeech. All democrats must be vigilant against these risks. https://t.co/0qkpFMh8Mu
— Joanna Cherry KC (@joannaccherry) March 10, 2024
Some have pointed to the complete lack of trust that now exists in our political class:
Tom Baldwin, "I'm not sure I trust any political party, I certainly don't trust this flailing desperate Conservative party, to define extremism, to define where the limits are" @TomBaldwin66
"Defending democracy is something that should unite everybody. And there was a rather… pic.twitter.com/sp76VR9EgE
— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) March 10, 2024
This is absolutely extraordinary.
The Tories can define extremism any way that tickles their fancy, and ban anyone in a public role from meeting with anyone they've decided is beyond the pale.
Fascism has been bandied about too much recently, but this must qualify surely! pic.twitter.com/ZZJgPciwHr
— Edwin Hayward (@edwinhayward) March 9, 2024
Others have pointed out the ways in which the extremism definition could inevitably diminish our democracy:
In this model, the SNP and Greens can be considered anti-UK, hence 'extremists' and then banned for participating in public life, standing for election, obtaining funds. It's fun in proto-fascist Britain isn't it? https://t.co/YIhFNGIeHT
— Iain MacLaren (@iainmacl) March 9, 2024
It’s also worth being aware who the people leading this charge are:
Heritage Foundation alumni Robin Simcox – himself a radicalised extremist – is now the UK Govt appointed head of Britain's 'Commission for Countering Extremism.'
If you oppose fascism, or embrace socialist values, the UK Govt now claims you're a potential terrorist.
Jesus wept. https://t.co/WgEP3qmC5y pic.twitter.com/s8T4RS0Dt9
— GET A GRIP (@docrussjackson) March 8, 2024
Politicians seem to keen to label any group they don’t like ‘extremists’, even when doing so demonstrably makes life worse for everyone:
Are you a socialist? A member of Just Stop Oil or Extinction Rebellion? A supporter of Palestine? Someone fighting for cleaner rivers or banning bee-killing chemicals?
This increasingly fascistic regime are coming for you.https://t.co/q7FGdRliO3
— Bill McGuire (@ProfBillMcGuire) March 9, 2024
A thoughtful and powerful letter from 58 survivors of terror attacks driven by Islamist extremism: "exaggerating the risk will feed a cycle of extremism that will put more people at risk. It is the height of irresponsibility." https://t.co/iS1EyYFqBu
— Jo Maugham (@JolyonMaugham) March 10, 2024
Some pointed at the alleged ‘extremists’ that Gove and the Tories are so worried about:
Nowhere is there any evidence of hate or extremism. Just ordinary people calling for peace. https://t.co/CvuBcvEfZk
— 𝕁𝕒𝕔𝕜 🎲 𝕁𝕒𝕫𝕫 (@_JackJazz) March 9, 2024
Many are simply making fun of the situation:
📢BREAKING! Gove to announce new definition of extremism.
"We, the most hated government in living memory, have decided that extremism is anything that challenges our right to govern."— CrémantCommunarde #NoPasaran!⛔️ (@0Calamity) March 10, 2024
Would you believe that Labour is supportive of the general idea of updating the extremism definition?
Rachel Reeves states that Labour is supportive of Michael Gove's efforts to update the definition of 'extremism' pic.twitter.com/m62nuCux3T
— j (@jrc1921) March 10, 2024
If you are surprised, you probably shouldn’t be, as there’s pretty much no political difference between the two parties at this point besides the fact that one is in power and the other isn’t.
Where will it end?
You might be in complete agreement with Gove and the Tories that these people marching for peace in the Middle East are extremists – hence the new extremism definition.
The question you should ask yourself is what happens when your political enemies get in power and decide that you are the extremist?
Featured image via Wikimedia – UKinUSA
