"Right or Left, I want No Part in Extremism" - Milli Hill

[WhereDidSummerGoAgain]

A thoughtful article by Milli Hill today.

https://millihill.substack.com/p/right-or-left-i-want-no-part-of-extremism

I can't help but find myself agreeing with her.

I know there's been a lot of debate on here about Kelly-Jay and whether she supports the far right.

Milli's article links to a Twitter post by Tommy Robinson showing an event and his inner circle. Kelly-Jay is there, dressed in a Union Jack.

This is pretty conclusive now, isn't it? You don't go and hang out with racists like Tommy Robinson and pals in times like these if you don't support them, surely?!

Milli's stood up for Kelly-Jay before, but this is a step too far for her, and for me too.

Just wondering what others think? This really doesn't look like a mistake this time.

Even Trevor Phillips had to admit it was literally just 'normal people' there.

I don't think everyone on the march was a racist, or far right, or anti Muslim.

I do think the people who organised the march were. For example, it's not a mindless smear to say "UKIP were opposed to (Britain's membership of) the EU". They were. You can tell they were from what they said and what they did. In the same way, people like Tommy Robinson have repeatedly expressed far right rhetoric, has expressed very strong Islamic rhetoric, has faced charges for slandering a child refugee and victim of a severe assault. He has also posted racist tweets slandering a black man playing with his (white) grandchild more recently. And there was the picture of them in front of an 88 bus. Which is far right imagery. If you judge him by what he has said and what he has done he is far right. I don't think he has put much effort into hiding it.

Elon Musk's speech was vile and was explicitly trying to incite violence IMO. I would say exactly the same thing if say a trans right activist or a far left activist had used the exact same words "violence is coming for you. You need to fight back". It's the same language that when used about "TERFs" makes me think this person is an extremist who gets of on the idea of violence.

So I don't think it's fair to smear people for only going on the march. In Kelly Jay Keens case though it's different as she is apparently part of Tommy Robinson's "Ateam". I sort of can't blame her- if I had been through the level of harassment she had been through I might have also swung to the far right. But it does look like a swing to the far right. So I don't think Milli Hill was wrong to distance herself. And she did it while being very careful not to castigate KJK as "evil" or far right or implying she was deserving of attack. I think it was a very well written post.

It's a bit contradictory.
On the one hand, it's you can't judge people by association (true) and "just because people were on a march organised by an islamophobic racist doesn't mean they can all be called racists(also true IMO).
And on the other hand, the fact that many people were on the march proves there is a lot of support for Tommy Robinson's ideas.

Both those things can't be true.

I think there's a risk of repeating the mistakes of the past:
I can remember in my area, I think it was the very early 2000s the local councils made an effort to "reach out" to the Muslim community as there was concern about integration following some riots. The problem was the "community leaders" they reached out to were self appointed (there is no "leader" of British Muslims any more than there is a "leader" of white British women). And all men. So actually they weren't really "listening to the concerns of the areas Muslims". They were listening to a small selection of self picked loudmouth men. It was a mistake even if done for the right reasons. This approach was ctriticised tere was some course correction done and I don't think this is an issue anymore.

In the same way police forces that wanted to "listen" to marginalised groups wound up listening to the loudest most obnoxious trans rights groups because they were the voices that pushed themselves to the front. They claimed to be speaking for all of the LGBT but clearly that wasn't true. And when some LGB people said "hang on this isn't us" they were castigated and called traitors.

So now, you have a lot of public dissatisfaction with all sorts of things. Including housing and immigration levels. And Tommy Robinson, a loud shouty man is a self appointed "leader" or spokesman for the concerns of the British Public. But he is not. There will be people on the march who disagree with him. Let alone the vast majority of the country who disagree with him. But now on here women like Milli Hill, or working class people are almost being castigated as "traitors" or "out of touch" for saying he doesn't speak for us. If the political establishment assume that Tommy Robinson is some kind of community leader/voice of the people they will be taking the lazy way out of actually listening to everyone. And it will bite them in the arse.

I'm really not short of historical understanding of Nazi Germany, indeed my family lived there - my grandfather was there until his mid teens and he only died a couple of years ago.

Of course there was antisemitism in Germany before Hitler - there was antisemitism everywhere in Europe, then as now. But Germany was seen as one of the safer, more civilised countries for Jews. If you'd laid a bet a century ago on which country was most likely to blow into a fireball of antisemitism, it would likely be Poland, Russia, even France - NOT Germany.

My own family - and here's some nuance for you - were mainly worried about the far left, and though they were far from supporters of Hitler, they thought he might be a useful idiot who would burn out the far right.

Here's some more nuance: I certainly don't think that everyone on Saturday's March was racist, anymore than I think everyone on the Propal marches is antisemitic. But neither do I think all Germans in the 1930s were racist. You don't need 100% sign up, sadly. TR knows full well that if he'd called for a March against black and brown people he'd have attracted about 300 people. Just as Hitler knew that to attract German votes he had to talk about motherhood, fair wages and fresh air, not death camps.

So your claim to a tolerant Germany prior to the rise of Hitler doesn’t take anti-semitism into account? What about tolerance of Roma people? Or are you excluding them from your analysis also?

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/bavarian-precedent-roma-european-culture

I don't think everyone on the march was a racist, or far right, or anti Muslim.

I do think the people who organised the march were. For example, it's not a mindless smear to say "UKIP were opposed to (Britain's membership of) the EU". They were.

But being opposed to Britain’s membership of the EU isn’t racist or far-right is it? There are plenty of lefties (like Corbyn) who were euro skeptics (not that that precludes you from being a racist of course).

Roma were treated terribly everywhere. The British transported the Roma to the Carribbean to be used as slave labour https://www.travellerstimes.org.uk/features/feature-roma-and-gypsy-slavery (on the same terms as African slave labour. Not the same time as the white indentured servants that people sometimes bring up in comparison to the slave trade).
And Roma in the UK/France were experiencing very harsh treatment in the early 20th century.

So it's not like Germany was some tolerant paradise pre the rise of the Nazis. But there was nothing uniquely intolerant about them compared to the rest of Europe

I haven't made any claims about Britain being tolerant at that time.
PP on the other hand said Germany was "very tolerant before Hitler".
It wasn't.

Of course not! I have family members who voted to leave and they aren't racist.
I was using it as an example of calling a spade a spade I guess. If you want a less political example its like calling Richard Dawkins an atheist. I believe him to be an atheist because he has written books like "the god delusion" and has appeared on TV talking about how he doesn't believe in God. If I said you were an atheist I would be overreaching since I have no idea of your own views on the matter. I would be wildly extrapolating and that is wrong.

By the same logic based on what SYL has done and said and campaigned for I believe him to be racist and islamophobic. Based on what Elon Musk has done and said I believe him to be a billionnaire who has played with fascist symbolism (I don't know if this is a sign of his real beliefs or just edge lord behaviour) and is using his money to stir up discord and try to encourage violent activism within the UK.

Fair enough. Apologies. I think the way the Roma were treated has always been ignored in discussions around European countries and human rights in general. They always get forgotten about for some reason.

Quite.

Its so frustrating that people continue to insist that everyone with politics to the right of centre is 'far right' and therefore one step away from 'fascist apologists'.

And of course once you've branded them an extremist or 'far right', no one needs to listen to them or care what happens to them, because they're a wrong un anyway.

Its literally happening over the awful Charlie Kirk murder. People on social media saying he deserved it for his right wing views.

I find that abhorrent, and fail to see how that's leading society in a good direction.

I ended up refereeing an argument between some friends over UKIP some years ago.

One was going to vote for them, the other was adamant that 'UKIP are all racists.

Although there is probably a big overlap of circles in the Venn diagram 'racists' and 'ukip' that does not mean that ukip = racist.
Their policies were not inherently racist , although many of their supporters may have been.

Lazy generalisations are dangerous.

I wasn't comparing UKIP support to being racist in that way. I meant that it's like saying

Jeremy Corbyn is left wing.
Richard Dawkins is an atheist
The Pope is a Catholic
Nigel Farage is anti-EU
The cookie Monster loves cookies
Netanyahu is a Zionist
SYL is islamophobic/racist

All judgements made based on what people have said and done over their lives. I don't think all those positions are the same or inherently overlap. But we can't see inside people's heads so we judge them by their actions (and to an extent our own biases). I just dislike the really obvious, quite childish pretending with SYL. Stuff like posing with a UK flag in front of an 88 bus and then his supporters acting shocked/outraged when they say it's far right imagery etc.

it's clear he's not a member of the far right. Neither are the majority of the hundreds of thousands (million?) people who attended the march on Saturday. The far right, as in neo nazis, may well be hanging around on the fringes, but they are not the substantial part of this movement. I mean, there are a lot of women, mums, black people, Asians involved and attending

Um, you do realise that far right, as in the neo Nazis as you say, aren't just shaven headed, heavily tattooed, jackboot wearing thugs or whatever stereotype you want to play? Women, and yes mums can be too for example.
The far right/neo Nazis don't just announce themselves with jackboots etc. They present as your friend, your next door neighbour..

UKIP doesn't = racists
UKIP does = anti- EU ( or Britain's membership of the EU) was my point.
Maybe I used too contentious an example.

Right... so you think the Asians, Jews and black people on the march are actually far right, but just pretending to be normal average people? And that the mums and grans are really just jackbooted fascists underneath their cardigans?

I mean, it's just ridiculous on the face of it. Does it not make more sense to think, hmmm, this march had very few arrests, was really peaceful, attracted people across the spectrum of society, and its spokespeople specifically state that all are welcome... maybe they're not actually all racists and fascists at all?

The British people - or lots of them - are sick of mass immigration, illegal immigration, Islamism and Islamification, two tier justice, lack of free speech, and soft sentences for paedophiles and rapists.

We can argue whether their concerns are valid or not, but those are the concerns, and the people who have them perceive their concerns to be valid, which means the government needs to address the concerns or simply say "you are people we don't care about so we do not care about your concerns". I believe the latter would be dangerous given the views are clearly similar to Reform's views and Reform have a massive lead in the polls. Obviously governments need to do what they believe is right, but equally in a democracy ignoring voters is not wise electorily and doesn't entirely help your own agenda if it means you lose power and everything you did gets reversed by the next lot.

If Tommy Robinson is such a massive evil racist how come there were so many ordinary people there, smiling, hardly any arrests? How come so many black people were there (or are they all stupid black people who don;t know what's good for them - that would seem to be an on-brand racist leftist opinion in 2025?)

I watched quite a lot of video of the day. The only evidence I saw of racism was from a couple of white right wing racists who attended... they were moaning about Tommy Robinson and were being asked why the hell they are there if they don't support the cause, by a group of protestors who didn't appear racist at all.

Can I urge anyone who thinks Robinson is a disgusting racist to watch his recent Triggernometry interview and let us all know what he says and does which suggests he's racist.

I watched the "When Tommy Met Mo" documentary a decade or more ago. Watching it made me fairly confident that he was nothing like the MSM portrayal of him... I wish I'd paid more attention to my thoughts back then and actually drawn the obvious conclusion - that Robinson is a lot less dangerous and extremist than the MSM and people who would claim to be fairlly centre left or centre right and yet lie that Robinson is a fascist / racist.

I also note that his entire journey over the last 20 or 25 years started as a result of disgust at the sexual assault / grooming / rape of young girls, which does not in itself make him a women's rights hero, but should perhaps give his detractors a bit of pause for thought.

Are you saying that posing with a "UK Flag" is "far right imagery"? Or is it doing it front of an 88 bus that makes it "far right imagery?"

Was it far right imagery when Kelly Holmes celebrated her Gold Medal draped in a Union Jack? Is it far right when a white athlete wears the Union Jack? Or is sport the one place where the Union Jack ceases to represent fascism and instead represents unity?

Are people who don’t want children to be sexually abused now far right too? That was one of the reasons the police visited KJK. She was being ‘untoward about paedophiles.

Also, I remember that Australian case where they said KJK was ‘nazi adjacent’, if not a downright nazi. Judge stated from the evidence that had been submitted, which included listening to KJK’s own words, that accusation was unfounded.

It comes to mind that there seemed to be an attempt to vilify Moira Deeming there too for standing against what appeared to be child grooming or exposing children to age inappropriate sexual material, and erosion of children’s boundaries. Judge delivered a coach and four through that too.

I think it is a case of when you throw enough mud, some of it sticks in people’s minds. That is why propaganda works in many instances. Usually societies which don’t allow open debate. But even elsewhere, when something is said often enough, there is a lingering of it in people’s minds.

P.s. all paraphrased, not direct quotes.

BNP, football hooliganism, convictions for fraud and assault - I'm not sure why anyone considers him worth defending.

I also note that his entire journey over the last 20 or 25 years started as a result of disgust at the sexual assault / grooming / rape of young girls

Really? Do you think that is why he joined the BNP? What he was thinking about when he was brawling with his football hooligan gang

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-14278957

Or do you think it's likely that he was actually innocent, and just targeted for his beliefs, like some kind of martyr? It's odd that he doesn't just use his real name, but instead calls himself 'Tommy Robinson' after another notorious Luton football hooligan.

Perhaps I'm biased but I'm going to trust Julie Bindel over Tommy Robinson.

https://juliebindel.substack.com/p/grooming-gangs-the-rape-and-pimping?utm_campaign=auto_share

As far as I can see he has done everything he can to disrupt justice for victims of grooming gangs.

I think I have reached the point where, if people can't work out that Tommy Robinson is dodgy as f*, all I can advise is to beware of calls from the 'bank' asking for your login password.

It’s now been CONFIRMED by the Met Police that of the 26 arrests reported by the media only 8 were attributed to UTK British Patriots! 18 arrests were counter protest agitators.

Well well well whod'a thought it? Dodgy fuckers everywhere.

Can I urge anyone who thinks Robinson is a disgusting racist to watch his recent Triggernometry interview and let us all know what he says and does which suggests he's racist.

This.

It's like JKR and the transphobia all over again, you ask people deriding him for some quotes from Tommy that are racist or far right and you get crickets.

Have I ever said I agree with everything he says, or everything he believes, or everything he has done?

He is clearly a man with a troubled and troubling past, who has done plenty of stupid things, not least in his teens and twenties.

Does that make him a racist or a racist? No it does not.

But even if none of what I have just written we still have lots of people who (rightly or wrongly) are sick of all sorts of things like two tier justice, mass immigration, islamism, arrests for hurty words on twitter. Like it or not Ruper Lowe is popular, as is Robinson and Farage (Farage and Robinson hate each other by the way - hatred of Farage is one thing me and Tommy have in common).

I would strongly suggest that if you want to avoid fascism and racism the single best thing you can do is listen to people like Tommy Robinson, consider what he is saying, consider how popular it is, and consider whether or not there are elements that you (and labour etc) can take on board in order to ensure that the next government isn't a Farage-led corrupt Reform shitshow that privatizes the NHS.

Do you support free speech by the way? Do you believe that we should be free to say almost anything, subject to certain limitations like clear incitement to violence?

I believe that free speech is vital and that we risk fascism and racism more by clamping down on free speech than by allowing people we don't like to speak.