Are you a socialist? What about your child? Or are you anti-abortion? Maybe anti-Monarchist? A communist? Do you know someone who is like that? Then the Government thinks you are showing signs of extremism and should be referred to Prevent

[cakeorwine]

And if you are a teacher, then you have a professional duty to report them

Socialism, anti-fascism and anti-abortion on Prevent list of terrorism warning signs | Prevent strategy | The Guardian

A document from Prevent, the official scheme to stop radicalisation, includes believing in socialism, communism, anti-fascism and anti-abortion in a list of potential signs of ideologies leading to terrorism.

It comes as the Conservative government considers widening what it will consider to be extremism.

The document is part of online Prevent awareness training for those covered by the duty to inform if they suspect radicalisation. That includes teachers and youth workers.

In a section on the left wing it states: “Two broad ideologies: socialism and communism. Each are united by a set of grievance narratives which underline their cause.”
In a section on single-issue ideologies, the document reads: “Narratives are likely to come from those who seek to change a specific policy or practice, as opposed to replacing the whole economic, political or social system. Examples include animal rights, anti-abortion or anti-fascism. Single-issue narratives can be politically agnostic, meaning they may be neither right nor left aligned.”

Neil Basu, a former police head of counter-terrorism, said: “That is far too nebulous, and there is no qualification. It might lead to unforeseen consequences such as overwhelming the system and bringing the system into disrepute.

The document:

You need to do the training to see the document

Awareness course | Prevent duty training (support-people-susceptible-to-radicalisation.service.gov.uk)

You have hit it on the head! People on here wanting to report everybody they deem "a terrorist in the making" is really scary to me.

I have a little list now!

s

That made me laugh! Thanks!

Single issue
Narratives are likely to come from those who seek to change a specific policy or practice, as opposed to replacing the whole economic, political or social system. Examples include, animal rights, anti-abortion or anti-fascism. Single-issue narratives can be politically agnostic, meaning they may be neither right nor left aligned.

*Less well recognised motivations, such as:

• involuntary celibates (incels)
• left-wing
• eco-terrorism
could also meet the threshold of terrorist intent or action.
Commitment to and knowledge of ideology can also vary significantly. *

• Below the surface is hidden activity that builds up leading to violence.
• Terrorism starts with attracting people
• Extremist groups and radicalisers aim to incite someone to support terrorism or become a terrorist themselves.

*Established terrorist narratives exhibit common themes such as:

• antisemitism
• misogyny
• anti-establishment*

Yet Transgenderism ideology is somehow not included. Despite it meeting every single criterion listed and every single warning sign drummed into us at Prevent training.

What do you think "such as" means - it's not a definitive list.

It's "such as"

You might like to read this.

No 10 faces Tory backlash over plans to broaden extremism definition | Conservatives | The Guardian

The rightwing Tory MP Miriam Cates and Lord Frost, the high-profile rightwing peer, are among those who have expressed opposition amid concerns that the move could have an inadvertent impact on anti-abortion groups, advocates for socially conservative causes and those opposed to transgender rights.

“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.”
“These are debates that we should be able to have lawfully in society. We should be able to call each other extremists, but it also means those views should not be banned,” said the MP, one of the leaders of the New Conservatives grouping of Tory MPs.

"Broadly, these are categorised as:

• Islamist terrorist ideology
• extreme right-wing terrorist ideology
• left-wing, anarchist and single-issue ideologies"

It certainly seems significant that "left-wing" ideologies in general are seen as potentially leading to radicalisation. But "right-wing" views don't have the same issues - only "extreme right-wing terrorist ideologies". If someone thought that wording was acceptably politically neutral, they're severely lacking in critical thinking skills.

It’s really rich that being against the monarchy counts as being anti democratic extremism.

The government are telling us that's what we should do.

Surely being against the monarchy is likely to make you pro-democracy?

I don't disagree with you, @cakeorwine. I'm very much a small-L-liberal, and I do disagree with widening the scope (lowering the threshold?) of what should come under Prevent. It's just that I have sat through annual Prevent training since it was rolled out, thinking "How can they not see that all this applies precisely to trans ideology?" But, no, people who support the sterilisation of unhappy children and want to insert males into places with vulnerable females apparently pose less danger to society than people who think our head of state should be elected.

Revealed: legal fears over Michael Gove’s new definition of ‘extremism’ | Politics | The Guardian

And here it comes:

The ultimate cancellation if you are seen as extremist

Michael Gove is set to announce a controversial plan this week to ban individuals and groups who “undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy” from public life, despite fears inside government that the scheme is at risk of a legal challenge, leaked documents reveal.
Officials working for Gove, the secretary of state for the levelling up, housing and communities, have drawn up plans for “trailblazer” departments to pilot the scheme, according to documents that have been circulated to the Home Office and Downing Street and seen by the Observer.

Organisations and individuals that breach a new official definition of extremism will be excluded from meetings or any engagement with ministers, senior civil servants, government advisory boards and funding.
Councils will be expected to follow the government’s lead, cutting any financial ties or support to individuals or groups that have been categorised as extremist.

Are they going for the Muslim Council of Britain?

A MCB spokesperson said: “Extremism and terrorism are serious matters that require real leadership and not cynical electioneering. To suggest that the Muslim Council of Britain would fall under arbitrary definitions of extremism is offensive, ludicrous and dangerous.
“We are a democratic organisation representing a cross-section of British Muslims. After standing accused of peddling Islamophobia, it is ironic that the governing party should lash out and accuse everyone else but themselves of extremism. We shall be monitoring developments and will seek to reserve our position legally.”
Palestine Action said no new definition would deter it from campaigning.
A government spokesperson said:“We are taking action to ensure that no extremist organisations or individuals are being given a platform by their actions and interactions with government. We will set out further details shortly.”

Wow, that's got potential issues for freedom of the press for starters

Is he announcing he is going to ban himself?

There is the law of unintended consequences.

If an organisation is banned, then they would rightly be able to claim that it is unfair if others aren't banned.

excluded from meetings or any engagement with ministers, senior civil servants, government advisory boards and funding.
Councils will be expected to follow the government’s lead, cutting any financial ties or support to individuals or groups that have been categorised as extremist

A bit extreme.

Anyway, how do you move forward if you refuse to talk to each other?

It's been tried before

Theresa May’s counter-terrorism bill close to ‘sinking without trace’ | Counter-terrorism policy | The Guardian

This is a small part of a bigger endgame.

The trucker protests saw funding taken from participants.

CDBC and control through bank accounts is already being put on the table.

Organisations such as the WEF admire the Chinese Social Credit system.

Carbon credits are another big idea.

The use of "AI" and algorithms to mine data and flag those in opposition to the "New World Order" is already in place.

Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, but the world is being remodelled to funnel power and money in one direction only.

I'm happy to be flagged as an enemy of the state - my Dad is a nuclear test veteran and I know alot about the underhand tactics employed against those who challenge TPTB.

Looking forward to my "re-education".....

Prevent has been a thing in schools since 2015 when Shamima. begun and her friends joined isis.
its not new

I’ve had Prevent training, as have all my colleagues

Starmer is doing a fine job rooting out the socialists in Labour on his own.

The widening of the definition is new and is what's worrying people.
It's all a bit stalin-esque imo

Definitions are widening.
Mission creep and all

I did that prevent training recently and thought it was a bit like you could think wrongly according to the government.

but I was so keen to get it over with I didn’t examine it carefully. Thanks for this thread!

This is why I would love a conversation with Gove or Sunak and discuss these points.