For any objective observer of British politics, Michael Gove’s new definition of ‘extremism’ is only remarkable for the absence of any mention of his own party. What this Tory minister is in effect trying to do – and in complete accord with the whole thrust of government legislation – is to demonise dissent.
What has sparked Gove’s sudden drive for a new ‘definition’ of extremism is the unprecedented wave of support for Palestine, in the light of the genocidal Israeli bombing and ground war in Gaza. More people have taken to the streets over this issue, and more often, than for any other political issue in modern times, including the infamous Poll Tax of Margaret Thatcher. Millions of people around the world believe the policy of Israel, in killing tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza, is extreme.
The Tories and the whole political establshment, including the leadership of the Labour Party, are aghast at this collapse in support for Israel and the subsequent radicalisation of youth. Despite the token mention of extreme right wing groups, Michael Gove’s real thrust, in redefining extremism, are Muslim organisations. This attitude chimes perfectly with the way ministers and the gutter press have labelled perfectly peaceful, anti-war demonstrations as “hate marches”.
Five Muslim groups, their names previously leaked to the press, were mentioned by Gove in the House of Commons. But as a spokesperson for these five groups said, “This new extremism definition is a solution looking for a problem. It attacks one of the cherished cornerstones of our pluralistic democracy – that of free speech”. Gove has promised to “take action as appropriate” against these organisations, although precisely what actions he failed to mention.
“Advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred, intolerance…”
According to the Guardian, the new definition, which will be distributed across government departments, reads as follows: “Extremism is the promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance, that aims to: 1) negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others; or 2) undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights; or 3) intentionally create a permissive environment for others to achieve the results in 1) or 2).”
By this definition, the Tory Party is itself guilty of receiving funds from an ‘extremist’, Frank Hester, who made comments characterised by violence, hatred and intolerance towards Diane Abbott MP. Hester also said Abbott should be “shot”, in a context where, according to the Speaker of the House of Commons, MPs are increasingly concerned for their personal safety. Hester, the biggest funder of the Tory Party, giving up to £15mn, is an extremist, by Michael Gove’s own definition.
There is one wing of the Tory Party, like those around Suella Braverman and Liz Truss, that repeatedly refers to asylum seekers and ‘small boats’ as if the desperate people risking their lives to cross the channel were an “invading army”. They make speeches precisely aimed to promote intolerance. Truss recently participated in a TV discussion in the USA, where notorious right-winger, Steve Bannon referred to the racist Tommy Robinson as a British ‘hero’…and Truss said nothing to contradict him.
When it suits the Tories’ class interests, democracy goes out the window
‘Democracy’ is an expression used by Tories only when it suits their class interests. When it doesn’t, then democracy goes out of the window.
We saw that during the miners’ strike of 1984-85, the anniversary of which we are marking at the moment. In its conduct of the strike, the Thatcher government abandoned any pretence of ‘liberal parliamentary democracy’. Secret committees conspired with chief constables around the country to actively break laws in order to break the miners’ strike.
When people like MP Lee Anderson, say “I want my country back” it is an coded declaration of hostility and intolerance towards all black and Asian members of the community. It is, like Anderson’s claim that London has been “taken over” by Islamicists, both racist and ‘extremist’.
Anderson may have now defected to Reform UK, but it was only just over a year ago that Rishi Sunak appointed him as vice-chairman of the Conservative Party. Anderson still has the support of thousands of the of doorstep racists who make up the Tory Party membership.
The British media, arguably the worst in the world, and completely dominated by billionaire-owned newspapers and media outlets, is the most important font of intolerance in this country. Never letting the truth stand in the way of their bigotry, the tabloids play the ‘race card’ incessantly.
It is almost as if the Mail, the Express and the Sun have an unofficial rota to stir up prejudice, so that on any one day there always seems to be one of them with a headline about the so-called ‘small boats crisis’. Not for them the real ‘crisis’ that affects most working class people, like the squeeze on living standards, the lack of affordable homes and the crumbling NHS.
Some concrete examples of extremism.
We know what fake extremism is within the Tory media, but what would working class people recognise as ‘extremism’? Here are a few suggestions:
*A government that forces millions of people, many even in work, to rely on food banks.
*Building companies secretly collaborating to limit house-building in order to keep prices up.
*Privatised water companies giving tens of billions to shareholders, while millions of raw sewage is dumped in rivers, streams and lakes.
*An NHS looted by the private sector week in and week out, so a river of public money flows from the NHS into private profits.
*A governing party that manipulates public expenditure to facilitate multi-million pound contracts for its friends and associates – much of it behind closed doors – is by definition attacking ‘democracy’.
It was noticeable that in her miserably poor response to Michael Gove in the House of Commons, Labour Deputy Leader, Angela Rayner, couldn’t bring herself to mention any of these things. On ‘extremism’, you couldn’t get a bus ticket between the outlook of the Labour leadership and the Tories.
In a blatant display of hyprocrisy, Labour head office is even sending out emails to members (begging for donations) which refer to the racist remarks of Frank Hester, but fail to even mention the name of the person who was the subject of Hester’s poison: Diane Abbott MP. That is because she is currently suspended by the Labour Party and persona non grata for the leadership.
There is a darker side to this extremism definition
Besides the regular hypocrisy – something we’ve all come to expect from this government – there is a darker side to this rush to redefine ‘extremism’. Gove’s speech and its welcome in the tabloid newspapers, is part of a calculated move towards the suppression of all dissent, and to put in place measures that can be deployed on a much greater scale in the future.
The government has already given the police extensive powers to limit or ban public protests – even on the grounds of making ‘noise’ – and although the powers have not yet been deployed against many marches, we should be in no doubt that they will be in the future. Likewise, the right of workers to go on strike has been effectively abolished, and union rights taken back a hundred years, by the Minimum Service Level Bill. Once again, the law has not been deployed on a large scale, but we can be sure it will be in the future.
The introduction of ID requirements for voting, which has already been introduced and comes into effect on a national scale this May, has nothing to do with voter impersonation. It is a straitforward attempt to suppress the turnout in elections, to the particular detriment to Labour.
There is a wing of the Tory Party which in the past would have been considered well outside the mainstream of that party. By the definitions of twenty years ago, the Lee Andersons, Bravermans and Trusses would have been branded as ‘extremist’, even by middle-of-the-road political commentators. It shows how far the established parties have moved to the right that these creatures are more or less mainstream today.
Then there is GB News, the only news outlet that appears to have no regulation of its output by Ofcom. It has leading Tory MPs, including Lee Anderson, fronting their own programmes and interviewing other Tory MPs. It is not only a channel dedicated to supporting the Tory Party, it supports the right wing of that party and a variety of outlandish conspiracy and right-wing causes.
We can see the outline of a particularly ‘British’ form of fascism
The huge losses of GB News are financed by Paul Marshal, a multi-millionaire financier. The campaign group, Hope not Hate, revealed last month that he has ‘liked’ and retweeted content from conspiracy and far-right groups. He has done this for months, Hope Not Hate say, “endorsing tweets [some now taken down] that call for mass-deportations and suggest a civil war between “native Europeans” and “fake refugee invaders” is imminent”.
With organisations like GBNews, Reform UK and politicians like Liz Truss, Suella Braverman and Lee Anderson, we have a wing of the Tory Party (or ex-Tories) that is moving in the direction of far right groups like ‘Britain First’, British National Party’, ‘Patriotic Alternative’, and other scum of that kind. This wing of Toryism is doing its best to make intolerance and hatred mainstream. It is peddles bigotry aimed specifically at Muslims today, but it will encompass the left in general tomorrow. These are the real ‘extremists’ about whom we need to worry.
It would be wrong to exaggerate the significance and political support of this extreme right wing political tendency at the moment. Nevertheless, it is possible to see, at least in outline, a specifically ‘British’ form of fascism developing in the future. It will become a more significant political force if the leadership of the labour movement fails to offer a way out of the social and economic cul-de-sac in which workers find themselves. It will become a serious issue, particularly among unorganised workers and those unconnected to the labour movement, if (or we might way ‘when’) a Labour government attempts to implement its own brand of austerity.
Within the organised labour movement, there will be a different reaction to ‘Labour’ austerity, in the form of dramatic shifts to the left. That new leftward surge is what would pose a danger to the interests of capitalism. It would be in that scenario that the same kind super-wealthy backers who are behind GBNews today, would be more than happy to finance a fascist movement with the aim of obliterating the democratic rights of workers and the labour movement altogether.
Michael Gove’s hypocritical definition of extremism is not just some wierd foible of a laughable Tory politician, an eccentric attempt to justify his inflated ministerial salary. It has to be seen in the light of the direction in which society is moving: towards crisis, class conflict and upheaval.
