This might well be the best commentary I have read on Sunak's announcement yesterday. To put this in context, Caroline Slocock was Thatcher's private secretary.
The reference at the end is to this site.
Let me contextualise this. This is all part of the ‘woke' agenda and there is nothing the government would like to do more than officially describe the National Trust as an organisation not promoting British values.
Be worried. You no longer need to be paranoid to think they are coming for you when if you have the slightest association with any environmentally concerned organisation they most probably are.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!
Speechless… really shocked.
Where is all this reframing of democracy and government coming from?
Sunak’s complete lack of any sense of personal and party accountability or integrity is breath taking.
That he should aim his remarks at the obsession of our very right-wing press to make illegal demonstrations by people they disagree with, while ignoring the hatred, harm and sheer malignancy that is growing unhindered by law, on the internet, is an epic failure of leadership.
Perhaps Mr Sunak might like to tell us from where the murderers of Joe Cox and David Amess drew their inspiration. The attendance of demonstrations or the Internet?
The Tories have had 14 years to do something about this and they have done nothing.
Here is the official gov.uk “Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered”
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-address-on-extremism-1-march-2024
Except that after a few lines it bizarrely says “[Please note political content redacted here.]”
That was the potentially libellous reference to George Galloway supporting (“glorifying”) Hezbollah, which like Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organisation.
Sunak is absolutely right to say “There are forces here at home trying to tear us apart.” He needs to take a long hard look at the rhetoric of some within his own party, including the likes of Priti Patel, and Kemi Badenoch, and Lee Anderson.
Apparently “Membership of our society is contingent”. So what is Sunak planning to do with the people that he does not consider to be “members” of our society? Are such persons outlaws? To be detained or expelled? Sent to camps in Rwanda perhaps?
It is absolutely the fact that there are many cases when the British Empire was on the “wrong side of history”. I could mention the Irish famine, the partition of India, and the shameful acts of extreme violence in colonial Kenya. As a person born and raised in the UK from UK parents, am I now at risk of being designed at as a non-person, and cast out of British society? (Note the irony that this policy is itself causing division in society; rejecting people whose reasonable and evidenced views about British history are unacceptable to the government.)
Unsurprisingly, Sunak is also selling the false myth that “success” is determined by “just your own hard work and endeavour”. When in reality luck and privilege have always been (and are increasingly important) factors to social mobility. No MLK, Sunak missed an opportunity to refer to the content of a person’s character.
The risk as I see it is that – like in Putin’s Russia – all sorts of opposition groups can be labelled as “extremist” at the whim of a government minister. And, despite lip-service being given to the operational independence of the police, nonetheless they are directed by the government to repress that opposition.
Terrorism and violent extremism are wrong. Hatred of Jews or Muslims, or of Hindus or Sikhs or Christians, is wrong.
But this muscular assertion of so-called “British values” could easily slip downslope towards an authoritarian police state.
And what is Labour’s position on this?
A great deal to agree with in what you say.
The Irish genocide and the claim that we are a meritocracy has been much discussed in this hoiusehold
And where is Labour? No doubt agreeing with him. They always seem to these days
Where and when will Starmer’s expose and condemnation of this dreadful speech be heard?
Just asking.
It won’t happen – Starmer/LINO are far far too afraid of being labelled extremnist.
On a more positive note – & what to do – this in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/mar/02/the-man-who-tricked-nazi-germany-lessons-from-the-past-on-how-to-beat-disinformation
There is much discussion on this site about the turn towards fascism that the UK is taking & what to do about it. Those driving this move need to be attacked in a robust fashion perhaps along some of the lines implemented by Sefton Delmer. One thing for sure, the nonesense spouted by Sunak & the tories will only increase as election day approaches. As for the laws implemented by the Tories, LINO will never repeal them – why would they?
Thanks
What a surprise – not- that yet again Starmer backs Sunak !
The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, appeared to back the prime minister’s message calling for unity in the country.
He said: “The prime minister is right to advocate unity and to condemn the unacceptable and intimidatory behaviour that we have seen recently.
“It is an important task of leadership to defend our values and the common bonds that hold us together.
“Citizens have a right to go about their business without intimidation and elected representatives should be able to do their jobs and cast their votes without fear or favour.
“This is something agreed across the parties and which we should all defend.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/01/extremists-trying-to-tear-us-apart-says-rishi-sunak-in-impromptu-no-10-speech
You never think that the government, the British Government, would “come after” ordinary decent citizens, until it happens.
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.” — Attributed to the prominent German pastor Martin Niemöller.
So what do the public have to worry about? The government’s own PREVENT counter-terrorism training now identifies “socialists” as a cause for concern, and grouped with “communists”. This would be no different to grouping Conservatives with Fascists. But socialists are now marked.
According to Wikipedia (not authoritative), socialists include Aneurin Bevan (creator of the NHS), Tony Blair, Keir Hardie (founder of the Labour Party), and Ken Loach (filmmaker). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:British_socialists
But of course there are different flavours of socialists just as there are different flavours of Conservatives. And this just goes to show that labelling can be politicised, and they may be just one step closer to coming for you too.
Sources:
“Terrorist Narratives: The Biases in ‘Prevent’ Training Show How Counter-Extremism is Politicised” (19 Oct 2023), Byline Times, https://bylinetimes.com/2023/10/19/terrorist-narratives-the-biases-in-prevent-training-show-how-counter-extremism-is-politicised/
Not sure if you’ve missed it, but most days on this blog Richard calls the Conservatives ‘facists’.
Tell me why I should not?
Is it the ghost of Joe McCarthy that I can see over Sunak’s shoulder?
“Overturn or undermine…its institutions…”
It’s a few short steps from institutions, to government, and thence to governing party.
So short, many might not notice them being taken.
Hezbollah arose in response to the Israeli invasion of 1982, helped by Iran. (At the time also fighting a war with Iraq started by Saddam Hussein )
It had a civil wing as well a military. It stood for election and gained representation in their Parliament. The US prescribed both wings but much of the EU did not.
Naomi Klein in her book Shock Therapy tells us after destructive 2006 conflict, with damage estimated at $9 billion, the ‘international community’ planned to re-build and proposed luxury hotels, houses, shopping malls and casinos on the waterfront where there had been homes. It was also proposed that some state assets be privatised. It seems Hezbollah and others, objected and they were given cash by Iran to give to the victims whose homes had been bombed to tide them over. They hired local contractors and volunteers to start re-construction. The projects were not filtered through the govt. or NGOs but by locals. They were indulging in politics but to an effect. The religion was Puritanical by our standards but that meant less tolerance of corruption. The American govt. didn’t like it, Klein says. I don’t know how much they did receive and it seems there is more corruption now, but it no doubt gained support.
The civil wing was proscribed by the UK govt in Feb 2019. My suspicious mind thinks it might have been to curry favour with the Trump administration to gain a good Brexit deal. The US Secretary of State at the time was Mike Pompeo who thought the Lord was at work in the preservation of Israel.
When we talk about terrorist organisations, we need to remember not all see them in the same way.
Added extraneous thought — THANK YOU for admirable postings in general…
WHY can’t any MSM investigative source deal with the ENORMOUS Tory corruption scandal of the TEESSIDE “FREEPORT” scheme…?? ‘Private Eye’ seems to have the only regular (and damning) coverage of this. The fraud involved is huge and translucent.
This has been bugging me for years now.
Not true. North East Bylines follows it too.
https://northeastbylines.co.uk/tees-valley-sets-up-cross-authority-group-to-consider-teesworks-review/
Given the context of the above this is a worrying development.
Also in light of the recent revelations about The Met how can less accountability be justified?
What are they preparing to hide?
UK: Law changes will make it harder to hold police to account for illegal data access
……………. changes to UK data protection law currently approaching their final stages in the House of Lords would eliminate the need for police forces to record the reason an officer has accessed a particular database.
The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill amends the 2018 Data Protection Act so that logs on consultation and disclosure of information held in law enforcement databases would no longer have to record the justification for consultation or disclosure.
The amendments would STRIKE OUT the following text from the law:
(1) A controller (or, where personal data is processed on behalf of the controller by a processor, the processor) must keep logs for at least the following processing operations in automated processing systems—
(a) collection;
(b) alteration;
(c) consultation;
(d) disclosure (including transfers);
(e) combination;
(f) erasure.
(2) The logs of consultation must make it possible to establish—
(a) the justification for, and date and time of, the consultation, and
(b) so far as possible, the identity of the person who consulted the data.
(3) The logs of disclosure must make it possible to establish—
(a) the justification for, and date and time of, the disclosure, and
(b) so far as possible—
(i) the identity of the person who disclosed the data, and
(ii) the identity of the recipients of the data.
https://www.statewatch.org/news/2024/february/uk-law-changes-will-make-it-harder-to-hold-police-to-account-for-illegal-data-access/
A most interesting post. Adding – below an edited extract from the G’
(https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/03/how-many-more-woman-will-die-as-police-forces-continue-to-ignore-red-flags-in-their-ranks)
“However, I do have a minority of officers who are corrupt, dishonest, unethical … They commit crimes, they neutralise evidence in important cases and they betray police operations and techniques to criminals” .. Sir Paul Condon, Met police commissioner in 1997 (to HoC https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmhaff/258-i/ha0103.htm ),
Institutionally racist, following the killing of Stephen Lawrence, (Macpherson etc)
Dangerously misogynistic, Dame Louise Casey, in her review of standards at the Met, said it had thrown protection of women, “out of the window” and called the force “institutionally sexist, racist and homophobic”.
It would appear, given the post by SteveH – that changes to the law will make it EASIER for the police to conceal corruption, racisims and misogynisim. In turn this begs the question: what on earth are the politicos thinking? Indeed, are they thinking at all? The proposed changes if implemented in, for exanple, the 1970s/1980s would resulted in the Birmingham Six never getting the justice they deserved. Sometimes, the devil is in the detail.
The last place I lived in the US was in Baltimore after I began working in Surgery at Johns Hopkins. Within spitting distance of the hospital there was a very unique little cobblestone street with brick sidewalks and simple row-homes built in the 1830s: that’s really old for the US! This street was rescued from demolition by the Mayor of Baltimore and the houses sold off for just $1; Stirling Street in Baltimore was the first ‘Dollar House’ project in America. Buyers were expected to put another $30,000 into renovating their home with strict rules governing the front facade. Some of the original ‘Urban Homesteaders’ bought two houses to convert into one.
I was attracted to the incredible warmth, unity and generosity of the residents of Stirling Street, so I lept at the chance to buy one of the double row-homes from a nurse I worked with in the OR at Hopkins. An amazing elderly African-American woman, former Jazz singer Ruby Glover functioned as ‘mother’ to everyone who lived on Stirling Street and she made me feel very welcome. There was a homogenous mix of people who migrated to Stirling Street, from a Doctor at Hopkins, to an actor from ‘The Wire’, a gay couple, an elderly couple who lent me tools, and a chap who turned the interior and rear of his double row-home into a German Castle that he rented out to a group ou young students. We all got along incredibly well and enjoyed an annual crab-fest on Stirling Street.
After the shock of 9/11 when I was away delivering a boat up from the Caribbean, I returned to a new sense of paranoia in the US, with fears of terrorism striking close to home. However, I felt secure, because I was totally convinced that the hijackers could not have prepared for their deadly attack while living on Stirling Street. How would the bombers have managed to hide their intentions when Ruby visited bearing cookies and telling them they look ‘a bit peaky!’ Hate does not survive kindness, compassion and community cohesion, so believe me, that is our easiest and most logical defence against the real ‘dangerous extremists’, not the Tory concocted ones. We look out for one another, we welcome the newcomers, migrants, asylum seekers and those who have fallen on hard times, wherever they come from; that is the safe inclusive, ethnically diverse community in which I want to live.
Running parallel to historic Stirling Street was the very dilapidated pedestrianized shopping street of Oldtown Mall, an area the City was determined to neglect until they could compulsory purchase and demolish all of the distinctive buildings. These buildings presented an easy target, as they were predominantly owned and occupied by minority run businesses. I circulated a petition for Historic District Designation and we gained a measure of protection for a portion of the remaining buildings, while we campaigned to persuade Baltimore City to stop the demolitions. My plan was to capitalize on the existing diversity of Gay Street by declaring it a ‘Global Village’ and restore the run down properties to create a desirable ‘destination’. I got considerable press coverage at the time, including an op-ed I wrote for the local African American newspaper; an achievement I was told was astounding for a white writer in our racially divided city. Although my efforts, when I lived in that small pocket of ethnic diversity in Baltimore failed, I still cling to the idealistic dream of creating a Global Village.
As I have already stated on this blog: “I am seriously alarmed by Sunak’s attempts to curtail our right to Peaceful Protest, labeling all the march participants ‘extreamists’, and demanding action to prevent what he is now referring to as the danger of ‘mob rule’.” I wrote: “I honestly believe that the most effective way to sabotage the disgraceful efforts of the government, to seed intolerance and division for political gain, is by taking proactive measures to accomplish the exact opposite. This is what I am trying to do where I live. I am proud to say that Oxford City has always supported the rights of Palestinians and welcomed migrants from all over the world”. Yesterday, after talking up my proposal for planting an Olive Tree as a symbol of our local commitment to peace, I resurrected that idealistic dream of creating a ‘Global Village’ in the ethnically diverse area where I now live in St Clements, Oxford.
Projects like this one promote community cohesion and make a strong statement in rejection of this Tory Government’s divide and rule tactics. Let’s face it, shamefully, ‘Divide and Rule’ epitomizes British foreign and domestic policy and has done so for a very long time. We can torpedo this agenda with projects that support unity and acceptance in all our communities throughout the UK. Just as the kindness and inclusion of Stirling Street would have proven impossible for terrorists to hide their destructive plot, so united communities like our proposed ‘St Clements – Cowley Road Global Village’ in Oxford will discourage or totally exclude genuinely dangerous racist extremists. The beauty of that task is that it doesn’t require City Council approval or permission for people and businesses to proactively make this a reality.
Thank you
That is very inspiring
This would also allow them to “proscribe” the SNP and supporters of Scots/Welsh independence and Irish unity.