Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Gove's plan to update description of "extremism"

40 replies

AdamRyan · 10/03/2024 21:12

Looked for a thread on this, as I thought it would be a hot topic on here but I can't find one!

Michael Gove is planning to update the definition of extremism:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/groups-fear-they-will-be-caught-out-in-new-definition-of-extremism-13092141

The updated definition is going to, according to a source, be the "promotion or advancement of ideology based on hatred, intolerance or violence or undermining or overturning the rights or freedoms of others, or of undermining democracy itself".

Miriam Cates is concerned this could affect GC activists or people with religious views

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/05/senior-tories-criticise-no-10-plans-to-broaden-extremism-definition

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.”

I don't like the inclusion of "intolerance" in a definition of extremism and I'm worried this could be used to silence people with particular views the government of the day doesn't like, e.g. GC views.

Fears government will use new lists of extremists to embarrass Labour

Rishi Sunak's government will make a big announcement this week. But with exact plans under wraps, there are fears the new definition could impact groups such as trans rights activists - as well as point out links with Labour.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/groups-fear-they-will-be-caught-out-in-new-definition-of-extremism-13092141

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Camilley · 15/03/2024 10:04

ginasevern · 14/03/2024 16:18

Did you really mean that you're very surprised this is coming from the Tories?

Show quote history

Yes, they're staunch advocates of women's rights.

Ramblingnamechanger · 15/03/2024 00:10

I think I saw a bit of Gove’s proposal on BBC news tonight. I was interested that he said it wouldn’t apply to gender critical people, but then in the next sentence he added , nor to the trans activists, appearing to put us in the same box and as we know, the threats and hate are actually coming from one side, and it’s not ours.

mach2 · 14/03/2024 21:45

I think the terms "terrorism", "extremism" and "hate" should be nowhere near the statue books. Only specific and palpable harms:

  • Causing explosions
  • Murder
  • Assault
  • Harassment etc

Blundering idiots like the current political class should not be allowed anywhere near tricky concepts. They fail the "both hands and a torch" test.

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 20:30

It's not really "indistinct" as an adjunct to a crime. Beating anyone up is a crime. Randomly beating up a stranger because they are gay/black/disabled etc is "aggravated" and attracts a more severe punishment. Also it gets recorded for tracking purposes. I think that's a good thing.

Personally I'd like to see anti-woman crime also treated as a hate crime.

OP posts:
RebelliousCow · 14/03/2024 20:25

AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 18:07

Well that's a bit different isn't it. Hate crimes are normal crimes where "hate" has been an aggravating offence. I think cracking down on that is a good idea.

I see 'hate' more as a rather indistinct and subjective matter, with the potential for a censorious modus operandi.......whereas outining a definition of 'extremism' is far more straightforward. As I understand it it is meant to prevent extremist groups receiving public subsidies or support.

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 18:58

BackToLurk · 14/03/2024 18:55

That's from 2015 I think (hence the prominence of Ed) the proposals for the next manifesto are here. Although they may go the way of the Green Deal https://labourlist.org/2023/05/labour-manifesto-2024-election-what-policies-npf-party/

Show quote history

Thank you!
I'm none the wise about the "hate" stuff then - it's not in there. I guess we will have to wait for the manifesto

OP posts:
BackToLurk · 14/03/2024 18:55

AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 15:39

Luckily they publish their policy so easy to check:
https://www.policyforum.labour.org.uk/uploads/editor/files/HM2_Policing_crime_and_justice_manifesto.pdf

Labour will:
• Protect the strong powers we need to
control dangerous terror suspects
• Overhaul the ‘Prevent’ programme to
tackle radicalisation, boosting support
for community based work to counter
extremist ideology and extending the
number of local areas receiving
support
• Ensure people returning from the
Syrian conflict are properly dealt with:
in addition to arrest and prosecution,
people returning will be required to
engage with de-radicalisation
programmes to confront the
consequences of their actions
• Make sure our investigative laws,
powers and safeguards stay up-to-date
with changing technology
• Drive forward a cross-government
strategy to prevent hate crime, with
action in schools, universities and
social media

That's from 2015 I think (hence the prominence of Ed) the proposals for the next manifesto are here. Although they may go the way of the Green Deal https://labourlist.org/2023/05/labour-manifesto-2024-election-what-policies-npf-party/

Revealed: Full draft policy platform that could form 2024 Labour manifesto – LabourList

Labour has drafted its most comprehensive policy programme yet for a Keir Starmer government, drawing up a provisional but wide-ranging blueprint likely to shape the…

https://labourlist.org/2023/05/labour-manifesto-2024-election-what-policies-npf-party

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 18:50

Noicant · 14/03/2024 18:14

I thought it was primarily to stop those groups from accessing government funding or operating with ministries etc.

Yes Gove's plan is. I was responding to rebellious.

I'm a bit confused to be honest as I thought all public sector organisations had to do a lot of due diligence already.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 14/03/2024 18:33

There's an increasing argument to classify Stonewall as extremist especially after this week and their reaction to the NHS update on puberty blockers tbh.

Noicant · 14/03/2024 18:14

I thought it was primarily to stop those groups from accessing government funding or operating with ministries etc.

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 18:07

Well that's a bit different isn't it. Hate crimes are normal crimes where "hate" has been an aggravating offence. I think cracking down on that is a good idea.

OP posts:
RebelliousCow · 14/03/2024 16:51

AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 15:36

I don't think so Confused If they are I've missed it.

Show quote history

They are definitely making a 'big thing' about how they intend to ramp up dealing with " hate crimes".

ginasevern · 14/03/2024 16:18

Camilley · 11/03/2024 22:47

I can see how easily this could be used to signal the end of events such as 'Let Women Speak', very surprised this is coming from the Tories.

Did you really mean that you're very surprised this is coming from the Tories?

RedToothBrush · 14/03/2024 15:43

AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 12:54

So are you in agreement with Gove's proposal? Or is it a proposal that's OK for the Conservatives to make, but would be dangerous under a Labour government? The latter Implies inadequate safeguards to me.

The proposals are not helpful in their current state because there's a number of areas which are inadequate in terms of definitions.

I get the impression the bill is still far from ready to go to the next stage, as there are so many concerns.

I think the lack of definitions is problematic regardless of who gets into power next because it's open to abuse.

The prevention of terrorism act is notorious for being applied to situations which it wasn't remotely designed for and this bill currently is the same. Both main parties are guilty of having used this act in this way.

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 15:39

Luckily they publish their policy so easy to check:
https://www.policyforum.labour.org.uk/uploads/editor/files/HM2_Policing_crime_and_justice_manifesto.pdf

Labour will:
• Protect the strong powers we need to
control dangerous terror suspects
• Overhaul the ‘Prevent’ programme to
tackle radicalisation, boosting support
for community based work to counter
extremist ideology and extending the
number of local areas receiving
support
• Ensure people returning from the
Syrian conflict are properly dealt with:
in addition to arrest and prosecution,
people returning will be required to
engage with de-radicalisation
programmes to confront the
consequences of their actions
• Make sure our investigative laws,
powers and safeguards stay up-to-date
with changing technology
• Drive forward a cross-government
strategy to prevent hate crime, with
action in schools, universities and
social media

https://www.policyforum.labour.org.uk/uploads/editor/files/HM2_Policing_crime_and_justice_manifesto.pdf

OP posts:
Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 15:36

RebelliousCow · 14/03/2024 14:28

Aren't Labour promising to do something simlar themselves, but calling it " hate" rather than "extremism". At least the extremist groups are going to be very specifically defined, and even named; wheras the concept of "hate" is fairly random and subjective?

Show quote history

I don't think so Confused If they are I've missed it.

OP posts:
DrBlackbird · 14/03/2024 14:58

Going by the R4 interviews today, it seems that this guidance is primarily in response to concerns about groups putatively espousing Islamic extremism and some far right groups. And then linking this to withdrawal of govt funding. Not sure LWS receive govt funding do they?

but hands up, I’m going by the R4 coverage and nothing more [edit for this acknowledgment]

ResisterRex · 14/03/2024 14:31

AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 12:36

Labour have also said they will "inherit" the change which surely must worry those who believe Labour is "captured" because it will give a mechanism to categorise bodies like LGB alliance as extremist and banned from engaging with government.

It's a very short sighted move.

If elected, Labour can withdraw it. Simple.

RebelliousCow · 14/03/2024 14:28

AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 12:36

Labour have also said they will "inherit" the change which surely must worry those who believe Labour is "captured" because it will give a mechanism to categorise bodies like LGB alliance as extremist and banned from engaging with government.

It's a very short sighted move.

Aren't Labour promising to do something simlar themselves, but calling it " hate" rather than "extremism". At least the extremist groups are going to be very specifically defined, and even named; wheras the concept of "hate" is fairly random and subjective?

SinnerBoy · 14/03/2024 12:58

AutumnCrow · 11/03/2024 21:19

But gender critical feminism has already been held to be legally WORIADS (Worthy Of Respect In A Democratic Society), surely?

I have been pondering Labour's plan to put TQ at the forefront, in medical treatment and the victims of hate crime. How does that square with the precedent set at Maya's tribunal appeal? It's certainly going to be in conflict with the ruling that people don't have to say "TWAW" and are entitled to say, "TWAM."

Would a new law just over-ride that, or would it be sent back by The Lords?

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 12:54

So are you in agreement with Gove's proposal? Or is it a proposal that's OK for the Conservatives to make, but would be dangerous under a Labour government? The latter Implies inadequate safeguards to me.

OP posts:
pronounsbundlebundle · 14/03/2024 12:51

The law should be based in fact and material reality and a common understanding of words - we run into terrible problems as a society if it is not - so any law like this needs cast iron definitions of what 'intolerance' means etc.

pronounsbundlebundle · 14/03/2024 12:50

It's all about who controls the meaning of words.

If you define 'intolerance' and 'hatred' as women wanting the right to single sex spaces so they can access public life, then this law can be used to harm women.

We've already seen people who say transwomen are men being branded as extreme hateful bigots, whilst those who physically attack and abuse women are labelled 'progressive'. The actions show which side is hateful in reality but it depends who is deciding. We've now had multiple court cases where women being reasonable have been branded as extremist and have had to go to ETs to show that actually it's the exact opposite.

Original poster
AdamRyan · 14/03/2024 12:36

Labour have also said they will "inherit" the change which surely must worry those who believe Labour is "captured" because it will give a mechanism to categorise bodies like LGB alliance as extremist and banned from engaging with government.

It's a very short sighted move.

OP posts: