I posted this as a Twitter thread this morning:
The Government has apparently drawn up plans to broaden the definition of extremism to include anyone who “undermines” the country's institutions and its values.
I do that.
Should I be worried? A thread....
Like any sane person in a country where so much of the state does not function as it should, of course I want to undermine the institutions that are failing us and the values that have driven them towards failure.
The UK is failing so badly that there is, in fact, almost no institution of government within it that I am convinced should survive as it is now.
Let's start with the constitution, and the fact that we have not got one. I am incredibly keen on that changing.
I would more than happily see the monarchy depart. I'm not a eugenicist, so of course I cannot believe in a hereditary head of state.
For the same reason, I want the hereditary peers gone.
I am not too keen on just one church having a formal role in parliament. Or, in fact, any church or faith having that role. So, the bishops should be gone from the Lords as well.
And then the other peers should go too. I'm so subversive that I would like to live in a democracy.
For that same reason, I'd like every vote cast in the UK to count. So I'm in favour of proportional representation. That's so radical that everyone in Europe, bar Belarus and us, has it.
I'd also end 'the crown prerogative' that gives the UK's prime minister unaccountable power. That should simply not happen in a democracy.
Then, I am quite keen on a Bill of Rights so that Home Secretaries cannot brand me an extremist for disagreeing with them.
I am also quite keen on barring discrimination when our government seems intent on promoting it.
And just for the record, I'd like to honour international law on things like human rights, the rule of law, refugees and asylum seeking and also on the laws regulating war. I think the world might be a better place if we did all those things.
I'm pretty keen on having governments that are required to have a bias to the poor as well. What we now have is a system biased to wealth that vilifies the poorest in our society when the whole purpose of government should be to provide protection to the vulnerable.
For the same reason, I'm keen on extending the duty to perform that our government is now so keen on imposing on state employees to the functions of the state itself. I'd like a statutory right to health care, education, social care and justice when, right now, all are failing.
I mean, is it too much to ask that ministers have a duty to do their jobs and if they can't or won't, that they be required to go?
I'd love an economy that works. But that means abolishing the role of the Bank of England within it, whose sole function is to keep inflation low whatever the cost to ordinary people, and all in the interests of protecting the value of debts owed to banks and the wealthy.
I'd also like a government that understood we can afford to do anything of which we are capable - and not one that thinks that its sole job is the mundane task of balancing its books, for which there is no known need.
And since we're only capable of delivering all of which we are capable if everyone is at work in well-paid employment, that should be the goal of economic policy, laid down in law. The idea that beating inflation is our national priority has to go.
That said, let's make sure we also respect the environment and really go for the climate transition we need. Life depends on it, but you'd never know that right now based on the actions of our politicians.
What else is there? Well, let's recognise the fact that we're a supposedly United Kingdom by recognising the right of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to leave it if they wish rather than have England impose their will on them. There's nothing united about that.
And given where we are internationally, can we stop pretending we are a global superpower with aircraft carriers in the Pacific and instead reflect on the only role of which we are now capable - which is of being an international peacemaker?
That, though, might require some serious contrition for past errors of the colonial era, for which proper apologies would have to be given. A real commitment to development might be some indication of that. Savings in aircraft carriers might help that.
And then let's come to the functioning of so much of the state these days - where the pretence is that unless such activities look as if they are akin to a private sector company then they cannot work. That notion is totally wrong.
Education, healthcare, social care and so much else should not be run by outsourced agencies competing for resources, each pretending that it is meeting the needs of its customers - as HM Revenue & Customs calls taxpayers - in the sector in which they work.
To be unambiguous, the structures that are mimicked by too many public sector institutions these days are based on organisations set up for profit where the possibility of failure is openly recognised. That is not what we need for state-based services.
The state is a not-for-profit institution that cannot fail without major harm resulting. Let's not pretend otherwise, which is what is happening now. If you set up organisations on a false premise - which most of our state sector is - then of course they will fail.
So, we need to build a new idea of institutions, and government itself, run in the public interest - which is their whole reason for being. Only then can they work.
And what else would I change? The libel laws, which are designed to prevent free speech in this country.
And I would require that British paper and media companies were British owned - and not under the control of a single person or group of people.
And I'd want a decent press regulator. We very clearly have not got one.
I would also really prefer that natural monopolies - water, energy supply, rail, post, local transport and more - be run by the state because then those services might work, when they do not right now.
I could go on, I am sure. But my point is this. Is wanting such reform extremist, because there is not much left untouched by this agenda - which I think most people might agree with it in reasonable part (OK, the monarchy aside)? And if so, why?
For the record, if it is extremist, Braverman can come and get me.
But I doubt she will.
Why's that? Because, in reality, her agenda is deeply racist, as ever.
Being white will save me from her like, for now.
But will it forever?
I wish I was that confident.
And why should that be the case, anyway?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Well said.
Interesting isnt it that the ‘Prevent’ agenda doesn’t say anything about breaking what campaigners call the ‘school to prison’ pipeline.
That of course would involve holding schools to account and we cant have that can we.
Pastor Martin Niemöller’s poem “First they came for…” includes the line “Then they came for the Socialists”.
The government Prevent radicalisation training includes a section on “Left-wing, anarchist and single-issue ideologies”, that includes “Two broad ideologies: socialism and communism. Each are united by a set of grievance narratives which underline their cause.”
Never mind the current government
☑️ Imprisons people without trial (Julian Assange)
☑️ Restricts the right to protest (even arresting journalists for covering events)
☑️ Allows water companies to discharge raw sewage into rivers
☑️ Arrests people for praying silently in public
☑️ Restricts the right to strike
☑️ Defunds public services resulting in austerity and the excess deaths of hundreds of thousands of people
Sources
https://www.hmd.org.uk/resource/first-they-came-by-pastor-martin-niemoller/
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/prevent-duty-training
https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/right-to-protest/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/05/investigation-after-57-world-triathlon-championship-swimmers-fall-sick-and-get-diarrhoea-in-sunderland-race
https://adf.uk/woman-arrested-for-prayer/
https://www.bma.org.uk/media/6687/bma-briefing-second-reading-strikes-minimum-service-levels-bill-mps-130123.pdf
https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/mortality-rates-among-men-and-women-impact-of-austerity/
I am aware of that
The Prevent profiling of socialism is deeply worrying
Interesting that the original Prevent strategy proposals had no mention of socialism.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a78966aed915d07d35b0dcc/prevent-strategy-review.pdf
What got to me was only ONE of my fellow staff at school saw it as an issue.
Your post is an extremist manifesto! ☠️
This story does not seem to be about Braverman, at least as the real source. According to ‘The Observer’, Michael Gove’s officials at the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities have drawn up proposals to redefine ‘extremism’ to include anyone who ‘undermines’ Britain’s institutions. The implications is that this will criminalise basic free speech. May we assume that this means supporting Scottish independence will become illegal, and the SNP will become a prescribed organisation? After all, independence fairly conclusively “undermines” the writ of Parliament in Scotland.
Notice that this is through Gove, not Braverman. It is a little odd that a Housing and Levelling Up Department is dabbling in Constitutional matters that appear somewhat outside the scope of its core activities, but I suppose that is the mark of the slippery and unctuous Gove’s methodology, or the dysfunctional nature of the arthritic, disintegrating operation of our pick-and-mix non-Constitution. Britain is Freedonia brought to life (‘Duck Soup’, 1933; Marx Brothers).
Do you think that Gove is after making his bid for Sunak’s job?
I have no idea. I surmise he may think if he couldn’t capture the top job against May, or even Johnson, Truss and Sunak, then he somehow lacks the required appeal, or popularity ever to win it. Conservatives tend not to like cleverness, or deviousness at least if its display is too obvious. On the other hand, the Conservatives have sunk so low, anything may now be possible; at which point Gove’s acute sense of self-interest may calculate the job is now little more than a poisoned chalice, laced with guaranteed failure. I suspect he is a true Balfourian Conservative, reflecting the Balfourian triumph in modern Conservative political life, as: “a man who would make almost any sacrifice to remain in office” (Harold Begbie, on Arthur Balfour).
Gosh, she’ll say “Off with yer head” !!!!!! Fabulous rant.
Rant? Huw dare you! 🙂
Very well said Richard. Nothing to disagree with.
Good to have electricity and Internet finally back (fingers crossed!) after the disruption caused by last week’s tempest here in Brittany (I’m 50 km from the coast but was still totally without electricity for 2 days). Lots of fallen trees but thankfully no physical damage chez moi.
Glad you are ok
We all need to stand up and say “I’m Spartacus”
That would make them cross
That’s the idea.
I think ‘Ceasefire now!’ would make more sense to most people, whch is what hundreds of thousands have been chanting for two weeks.
But surely this long list of reforms is not needed – Lord Hennessy got his ‘history’ peerage and priviledged access to govt sources, for assuring us that we had a ‘Good Chaps’ way of government that didnt need any rules – least of all a ‘constitution’?
That’s the first part of the poem about Naziism, isn’t it?
Tends to be forgotten.
“First they came for the socialists…”
Or was it communists?
Have any of you seen the new version of “Time” about women in prison?
One of them stole money for the leccy.
She was put in prison, came out and did the same thing as she still had no money to pay for power.
Back into prison as she had broken her parole conditions. When let out they had nowhere for her to live, having lost her home and her family, so the prison authorities gave her a tent to live in.
The latest is that tents are being made illegal, so if that was true, she’d be back in prison before she’d set the tent up!
Thousands of refugees are being put onto the streets, not just single people but whole families as they close hotels. Where are they expected to live?
Even if they have gone through the system and given permission to live here they can be put on the streets withing ten days, I think it is.
Who on earth in this country thinks that this callous government is fit to make any laws any more?
It is not
“The latest is that tents are being made illegal”
38 Degrees started a petition on this yesterday. It’s already got over 85,000 signatures.
https://act.38degrees.org.uk/act/homelessness-tents-petition
Amen to all of that, Richard And… it can hardly go unnoticed that this governmental ‘trolling’ comes hard on the heels of the latest round of a Covid Inquiry which has revealed a British Establishment whose negligence, incompetence and self-serving evasion of basic responsbilities any reasonable person could describe as extremist – that is extremist in its willful disregard of the well-being of its own citizens.
Fascists by definition don’t understand the issue is their lack of prosociality or sufficient thereof to all.
In one sense Braverman is clearly off her trolley; in another, having seen Boris Johnson’s trolley tendencies revealed in the Covid enquiry, she is a clearly a threat to our freedoms and is in a position of power because the people who have been in power have been those selected and enabled by money and its authoritarian tendencies.
Personally, I don’t see Braverman as a proper politician. She is just a gleeful disrupter who it appears does not like anything except sticking two fingers up to her detractors or winding people up. But she got where she is because of funny money – that’s for sure.
This is why we are where are. So one thing going forward is that the State alone must finance political campaigning and offer a flat rate of £1 million (say) for each party to use as campaign funds as a level playing field. And that – along with some rules and regulation – would be it. Let’s try that.
And BTW – a great post.
Thanks
It would seem sensible to me that campaign funding is directly related to the manifesto each party presents with penalties to be paid if manifesto policies aren’t implemented if office is won. Plenty of free market choice in this idea. What’s not to love by right-wingers! I’m sure they’ll be working hard to find objections proving what utter hypocrites many of them are!
Hopefully this requires primary legislation and I’d love see how she defines unless she leaves it to the police.
I also understands she wants to stop charities giving tents to the homeless because it supports their lifestyle choice. Maybe she has point they could sleep under a tree or in a doorway.
I’m thinking of getting a tea shirt with EXTREMIST on it. Perhaps we need a coloured ribbon to identify us and a Day of Mass Extremism.
Very good list . But also depressing, in that it has to be so long. In today’s context its very reasonableness makes it utterly extremist.
May be a minor point but – taking away PM prerogative to call elections at their convenience?
I suppose an underlying theme -is that rules and rights and accountability extend to those running the state and the various state institutions, and not only to individual citizens
Thanks
It’s always about you isn’t it, you disgusting, arrogant piece of shit.
Well, guess what, they actually came for the Jews first, again. And what did you have to say about it?
Fuck all.
And now?
Most of the left are actively supporting the terrorists who murdered those Jews and are taking part in “protests” glorifying it and calling for the genocide of Jews and the destruction of Israel.
The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Just shows how racist the left is. Safe spaces and anti-bigotry for everyone – except the if you are Jewish.
I will be replying as a blog post.
While you headline Braverman, implying that she is responsible for this document, the Observer article makes it clear that it emanates from Michael Gove’s Department for Levelling Up. Though no doubt it has Braverman’s full approval.
Leaving aside the iniquity of its proposals, it seems to me to be part of the effort to move the tory party further to the right with its desperately outdated vision of ‘Britishness’ which Gove had already demonstrated when Education Secretary in his attempts to revise the teaching of history with an emphasis on British ‘achievements and ‘greatness’ and minimising the more ‘uncomfortable’ aspects of Empire.
Gove has been associated with both the ‘New Conservatives’ movement earlier this year and latterly with the newly launched ‘Alliance for Responsible Citizenship’, reported on here:
https://www.politics.co.uk/week-in-review/2023/11/04/week-in-review-new-right-wing-movement-backed-by-kemi-badenoch-spells-doom-for-rishi-sunak/
Note this belief from Kemi Badenoch, with her eye on potential leadership of the tory party, “There is a role for government in terms of shaping culture — government needs to set out the vision for the way society will be.”
While I’m all for government ‘shaping culture’ by supporting principles of equality, decency, fairness, freedom of speech and respect for human rights through legislation I’m chilled at the thought of it attempting to control what direction a citizen’s thoughts and beliefs should take and wondering just how far Kemi, and her ilks’, definition of ‘culture’ will take them.
I appreciate that some of this is an attempt to appeal to voters with the prospect of a general election in the nearish future. It deserves to fail.
Maggie
It’s all neo-liberal bullshit.
If what a Government does helps ordinary people in some way, it is invalid in most neo-liberals’ eyes being a nanny state blah, blah, blah.
If however government behaves in a rational way that maximises the self interest of the monied (cos’ its all about money of course) then that is justified, apparently.
And money is power, money buys credibility, influence (funds the odd university place here and there) or funds ‘think tanks’.
Money is the focus of the neo-liberal because it is indispensable to neoliberalism.
How else could such half-arsed ideas have gained traction without wealth?
We need to strangle the money supply to neo-liberalism with tax and regulation if we are to put it in its place – the dustbin. .
I think that “ordinary people” buy into the neoliberal narrative is because they are promised that they could join the wealthy… if they work hard. That there is only room for one person at the top of the tree is irrelevant.
There couldn’t be a better manifesto for the Labour Party than your comprehensive list of values.
I live in hope.
Thanks
Exactly my thoughts too. It’s a bit of a wish list but it has just about everything (almost) in this country that I’d like to see changed or reformed. Labour might be surprised too how popular that the list would be with the British public. People know the country isn’t functioning properly and are in the mood for radical change
Pity its not avalible as a jumper
https://www.redmolotov.com/political-tshirts/all-i-want-for-christmas-tshirt
Whats your size Richard?
🙂
No single body (and its members and supporters) has done more to undermine the institutions and values of the UK in recent years than the extremists in the so-called Conservative and Unionist Party.
It starts from basic contempt for the rule of law and the rights of others, and proceeds from there.
Agreed
We are vering ever closer to dictatorship. It’s frightening.
Excellent Richard, I have had a similar list of my own for quite a while. All I would add is that they get out of that ridiculous building, and stop all the prancing about with swords in knee breeches. When the vermin have been dealt with, it can reopen as a tourist attraction, and Jacob Rees-Mogg can have a job as a guide, I’m sure he’ll be very popular. In fact I might even pay a visit myself.
In one post you have gladdened the hearts of all who follow you, Richard! Sanity still exists. Thank you!
Thanks
There is one omission in the comments, namely that isn’t this the same government that itself sought to undermine the apparatus of state by proroguing parliament and lost the case against it? Is this a pot and kettle moment?
You’ve absolutely nailed it Richard, and it makes me feel hopeful that somehow we achieve these changes.
Now on to read your post responding to the troll!
Thanks
If anyone is undermining this country’s values and institutions, it is this Government. Indeed, the undermining has been going on for over four decades, conducted by a succession of neoliberal governments.
Newspeak.
(Which interestingly throws back to the recent complaint about the words used to deride our politicians on this blog.)
When words are redefined we lose touch with their roots. As Wittgenstein showed, if we don’t have the label for something, we can’t think about the meaning – because we don’t have the words. We think in names, and without names there is no thinking.
Orwell understood. “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
“Fascism is the result of the failure of the left to provide an alternative.” – Trotsky. The question is: where is the left situated now? I fear that it is far to the right of the social democracy which you argue so well on this blog.
Thank you for the warmth of rays of hope I always take away from your writings.
Thank you
Appreciated
What a powerful and welcome post. There is not one word I would disagree with, well said Richard.
As for TBJ – I commend you for your measured response on the other blog, which only serves to confirm to me how decent a person you are. Long may you continue with your excellent website and appreciate articles.
Thank you
Nothing to disagree with there: all eminently sensible democratic reforms.
Regarding your claim that ‘Braverman can come and get me. But I doubt that she will’, might I suggest that you read the fine print of Priti Patel and Baroness Williams of Traffords’s – Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act of March 1 2021 – and see if you can still believe this.
Another dangerous development toward full out UK fascist autocratic state is to be found in Brandon Lewis and Lord Caine’s – Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act of September 21 2023 – which sets a legal precedent within the UK and N.I. that upends all international laws regarding state war crimes. As ever Britain’s very own Frankenstein colony of Northern Ireland is being depoyed as a legislative salient for the introduction of laws that open the door to legalising rogue state behaviour.
Shockingly vile criminality and abuses of power ar the highest UK state level.
Which sections of the first one?
A fine summary of a set of principles that anyone who sees themselves as being at the progressive end of politics ought to be able to support. It is a sign of the times that this would be portrayed by most of our politicians and their cheerleaders in the media as being somehow very ‘Left wing’. The Overton window has indeed been dragged way over.
Which of our politicians in recent years has spoken with such clarity and yes, eloquence?
Thank Robin
I had to delay going out birdwatching yesterday to write that….
Though i don’t doubt that the thought processes that go on whilst you are birdwatching, even if they are unconscious, are an essential part of developing pieces like this.
A message for all of us of the importance of the time and space to think, whether at work or at home. Squeezed out and not valued at work, in the name of productivity.
The response to the commentator was developed over 5k or so after reading it and before getting home. Not eholly consciously, but I had actually treated it as trash originally and then changed my mind. Being out made me realise that it was important to state my position, with all the risks that has associated with it, and risks there most certainly are.
This thought-provoking article challenges the labeling of individuals as extremists and offers a strong defense against such accusations. The author’s passionate argument for fiscal justice and progressive tax policies is engaging and offers a different perspective on the subject. It sparks a meaningful debate on taxation and its implications. Whether you agree or disagree with the author’s views, this piece encourages critical thinking and discussion on an important societal issue.
A man with a Irish name saying “Come and get me” to a British Home Secretary has some resonance, not that she’d have the first clue about any of that.
Apparently anyone wanting to change the constitutional form of the UK is an extremist now. So that will be the majority the people on the neighbouring island. Several million of them favour reuinfying their country peacefully and in accordance with international law. Extremists? Nice.
Categorising people as extremists is the mark of autocratic regimes, both of the right and the left. Some are extremist but not many.
They can also be the canaries in the coal mine. And as Shaw famously said, all progress depends on unreasonable (wo)men.
Indeed