The British government is broadening its definition of âextremismâ. On Sunday, the Observer revealed that Communities Secretary Michael Gove is close to finalising a review of ânon-violent extremismâ which began in spring this year.
According to the newspaper, which has not released the full document, extremism will be defined as âthe promotion or advancement of any ideology which aims to overturn or undermine the UKâs system of parliamentary democracy, its institutions and valuesâ or to âthreaten the rights of individuals or create a permissive environment for radicalisation, hate crime and terrorismâ.

It will also include, âSustained support for, or continued uncritical association with organisations or individuals who are exhibiting extremist behaviours.â
The existing definition of extremism is âactive opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefsâ. This was published in 2011 as part of the antidemocratic âPreventâ strategy, enforced in schools and throughout the public sector under the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015, AND used to demonise Muslims in particular.
Every years, thousands of people are referred to Prevent, a total of 6,406 in the 12 months to March 2022, a 30 percent increase on the previous year.
In the documentâs own words, the new definition broadens the focus from âactive oppositionâ to so-called âBritish valuesâ to âbehaviours that enable the spread of extremist ideology.â
This is a deeply authoritarian definition, providing a pretext for the suppression of virtually any form of political opposition and eviscerating the rights to free speech and political association.
The Observer reports that one document âlists a number of organisations which it considers would be âcapturedâ by the new definition.â Among them are âThe Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), Palestine Action and Mend (Muslim Engagement and Development).â Palestine Action has helped to organise numerous protests in recent years against Israelâs oppression of the Palestinians, including DURING the ongoing genocidal assault on Gaza.
Ilyas Nagdee, Amnesty International UKâs racial justice director, explained that the existing definition of extremism âis already being applied so broadly it seeks to effectively hinder people from organising and mobilising. The proposed definition takes this even further and could criminalise any dissent.â
The Tory government has sought to broaden the definition of extremism for years, specifically to outlaw âleft-wing extremismâ. This has been an over-riding pre-occupation of successive prime ministers and home secretaries.
In May 2017, the Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) was announced by then Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May. Three years prior, as home secretary, May promised that a Counter Extremism Strategy would tackle âthe whole spectrum of extremism, violent and non-violent, ideological and non-ideological.â
In 2019, the World Socialist Web Site explained how a report on âleft-wing extremismâ submitted to the Commission âset out to brand as suspect views held by millions of peopleâ, among them that âThe greatest threat to democracy has always come from the far rightâ and that âZionism is a form of racismâ.
In February 2021, Prime Minister Boris Johnsonâs Conservative government announced a review into âleft-wing extremismâ to be led by former Labour MP John Woodcock, now Baron Walney, in his post as UK Special Envoy for Countering Violent Extremism.
Last month, as anti-Gazan war protests escalated in Britain, with successive national demonstrations in London attracting 150,000, then 350,000, then 500,000 people, head of the Metropolitan Police Mark Rowley declared, âI think there is scope to be much sharper in how we deal with extremism in this country. The law was never designed to deal with extremism. Thereâs a lot to do with terrorism and hate crime but we donât have a body of law that deals with extremism and that is creating a gap.â
What it would mean to close the gap is indicated by the dictatorial statements of government officials in regard to the protests.
Fascistic Home Secretary Suella Braverman has repeatedly denounced the national demonstrations as âhate marchesâ, and described participants in a Times piece on Wednesday as âpro-Palestinian mobs.â She declared, âThe issue is how do we as a society police groups that insist that their agenda trumps any notion of the broader public goodâas defined by the public, not by activists.â
Bravermanâs ravings follow those of Commissioner for Countering Extremism Robin Simcox, who wrote in the Times, âHate marches in Britain are a wake-up call to all decent people.â Anti-war protesters, he said, had âbeen careful to construe their public displays of support just below the legal threshold for hate crime, glorification of terror, or public order offences⊠exploiting one of our proudest British values, freedom of expression, to pursue a shameful extremist agenda, the normalisation and promotion of antisemitism.â
Simcox and the home secretary were joined in their slanderous denunciations by former prime minister Boris Johnson. During a trip to Israel to offer the Netanyahu regime his support, he advocated for the banning of the planned November 11 march, accusing protestors of demonstrating âin favour of an anti-Semitic pogromâ.
The Campaign Against Antisemitism, a right-wing Zionist organisation, said the Met should ban the upcoming march under section 13 of the Public Order Act 1986, but that if it was allowed then Braverman should invoke special powers to direct Londonâs mayor to call in the military to reinforce the police.
Unable to dismiss the overwhelming opposition within the population to Israelâs war of annihilation, the police announced Wednesday evening that Saturdayâs march would go ahead. The home secretary can only intervene to ban the march if recommended to do so by the Met.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak responded by reiterating his personal opposition to the âdisrespectfulâ march and stressing that Met Police Commissioner Mark Rowley had âcommitted to keep the Met policeâs posture under constant review based on the latest intelligence about the nature of the protests.â
While currently unable to prevent this Saturdayâs march from proceeding, the hysterical attack on anti-war protestors and plans to massively broaden what can be defined as âextremismâ are an urgent warning of the direction of travel in the ruling classâhellbent on crushing all forms of dissent to impose its agenda of war and austerity. In this, they can rely totally on a pro-war, pro-âlaw and orderâ Labour Party, expected to win a general election next year.
It is no coincidence that rolling out a new dragnet definition of extremism takes place at this juncture, with Britain deeply involved in NATOâs war against Russia in Ukraine and Israelâs attack on Gaza. With millions on the streets around the world to protest Israelâs genocide, the ruling class fears the development of a mass, international anti-war movement. Above all, it is terrified that such a movement will take up a socialist perspective, animating a working class which has engaged in major battles over wages, working conditions and job losses in the last two years.
A raft of legislation is already on the statute book to deny this emerging movement its democratic rights to organise and promote its perspectiveâthe Public Order Act (2023), the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act (2022), the Online Safety Bill (2023) and the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act (2023).
In the name of combatting âextremismâ, even wider repression is planned, including blanket proscriptions on meetings and protests and the shutting down of whole organisations. As is demonstrated internationally, the ultimate target of this campaign is a socialist movement of the working class and young people against capitalism and imperialist war.
Source: Wsws.org