India Gordon
This year, the UK witnessed a level of national violence not seen since the 2011 riots. However, the violence this time seemed to have a clear ideological fuel: far right-wing populist sentiments driven by anti-immigrant and Islamaphobic rhetoric. These views, having been repeatedly reinforced by leading political figures, mainstream media, and social media platforms, have become deeply ingrained in British society. From this perspective, the riots serve as just one stark example of the concerning spread of extreme right-wing thinking. The urgent question then is, what can policymakers do to prevent future outbreaks of violence?
The July 2024 Riots
This past summer, following the tragic murder of three young girls during a ‘Taylor Swift’ themed dance class, the UK witnessed an arguably unprecedented level of violent protest in response. Across cities like Liverpool, London, and Birmingham, organised demonstrations quickly devolved into civil violence with widespread looting and assaults against many immigrant-owned small businesses, hotels housing asylum seekers, and mosques. The National Police Chiefs’ Council reported that over 1200 people were arrested for their involvement in the unrest, including nearly 150 juveniles.
While the need to condemn the unlawful killing of these young children was undoubtedly important, the ‘protests’ that followed quickly spiralled into senseless violence largely motivated by far-right ideology. Many protesters fixated on the ethnic background of the perpetrator, echoing an anti-immigrant narrative that overshadowed the murders. This came after some online circles misidentified the latter as a ‘Muslim refugee’ who had arrived in the UK by crossing the channel last year. Such violence sparked a national conversation about race and immigration in contemporary British society, with prominent figures, such as MP Nigel Farage and far-right activist Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley–Lennon), framing the Southport tragedy as a consequence of a national immigration ‘crisis’. Despite it later being revealed that the perpetrator of the attacks was a British-born citizen from Cardiff, the son of Rwandan first-generation immigrants, the rhetoric risked generalising and alienating all immigrants and their children as security risks, only fuelling further tension within communities.
Furthermore, these riots were met with arguably an insufficient government response. The responses of key political figures seemed to only downplay the significance of the riots. Sir Keir Starmer, who had been elected as Prime Minister just a few weeks prior to the unrest, responded by calling the violence an act of ‘thuggery’. Such language was arguably dismissive, treating the unrest as an isolated act committed by a minority of troubled individuals. However, such a view arguably fails to consider the bigger problem - that is, the 2024 riots are a symptom of long-standing anti-immigrant rhetoric, fueled by years of political and social turmoil.
Recent years have seen increasing traction of far-right sentiments
According to figures released by the Home Office, nearly 100,000 racially-motivated hate crimes have been seen in the past year, with a noticeable 25% increase in religious hate crimes compared to 2023.
This troubling trend of incidents could be fundamentally explained by the increasing widespread dissemination of far-right ideology, in no small part due to rhetoric peddled by leading political figures and media outlets. The Brexit campaign, spearheaded by then UKIP-leader Nigel Farage, built its platform off nationalist and anti-immigrant messaging. It primarily argued that contemporary immigration levels were unsustainable, redirecting blame for socio-economic disenfranchisement some citizens have encountered to immigrants. Mounting pressures facing the NHS, the lack of employment and access to adequate housing, and apparent increases in civil disobedience, have all been misattributed as products of immigration. This thinking evidently resonated with many voters. According to exit poll data conducted by Lord Ashcroft, over a third of ‘Leave’ voters cited concerns of immigration control as a primary motivation for their voting. Ultimately, however, it’s important to recognise that while socio-economic challenges may make some individuals susceptible to extremist rhetoric, this in no way excuses the violent actions, including those seen this past summer, that they choose to take.
The increasing anti-immigrant sentiments perpetuated by influential figures and media outlets like the Daily Mail and Great British News (GBN) have only further stoked the fire of populist sentiment, producing a narrative that immigration poses an inherent threat to national security and heritage. For example, these outlets have repeatedly run misleading headlines concerning ‘nearly 4000 thousand’ foreign-born criminal individuals living in the UK, despite no sufficient evidence to back such claims. Meanwhile, Farage, a regular commentator for GBN, faced criticism for fuelling conspiracy theories after insinuating that authorities may have been withholding vital information regarding the identity and background, including the immigration status, of the Southport attacker.
This pattern of misinformation and sweeping statements may only serve to enforce social divisions, fostering an ‘us vs. them’ mentality against immigrants and, in some cases, extending to those who don’t oppose immigration. Left unchecked, such divisive rhetoric has resulted in tragedy. For instance, the 2016 murder of Labour MP Jo Cox was committed by a far-right radical, who had come to disagree with Cox’s support for immigration during her advocating for the ‘Remain’ campaign.
Online platforms have only amplified these extremists sentiments
The dissemination of these anti-immigrant and far-right rhetorics have been facilitated by online spaces. The aforementioned misinformation regarding the Southport attacker’s identity originated online, quickly spreading and normalising racial prejudices. For instance, the Guardian reported that 38 charges had been filed following the riots regarding online hate speech, which included offensive language and the distribution of images ‘intending to stir up racial hatred’. This highlights the dangers posed by unregulated digital platforms in perpetuating extremist ideologies.
Figures like Robinson have built significant online presences, and with a click of button have easily been able to rapidly mobilise mass support for their views. During the 2024 riots, Robinson took to X (formerly Twitter) to propagate strongly Islamophobic and xenophobic messaging. In fact, research from the Centre for Countering Digital Hate revealed that Robinson’s tweets had garnered more than 400 million views, demonstrating the sheer influence afforded by such platforms.
The buying of Twitter by Elon Musk has been linked to an increase in far right sentiment with Musk himself having used the site to voice his concerns regarding so-called ‘two tier’ policing in the UK - the notion that those of the right are treated more harshly than minority ethnic or left-leaning demonstrators. However, this could be considered hazardous misinformation since data published by the Home Office shows that black individuals are seven times more likely to be subjected to a ‘Stop and Search’, compared to their white counterparts. In fact, formal counterterrorism legislation has arguably failed to account for right-wing terrorism at all. This is because cornerstones of British counterterrorism legislation like the Prevent strategy, tend to overly focus on intervening in the early stages of Islamic extremism, leading to a disproportionate targeting of Muslim individuals. This neglect of recognition for other types of extremism can perhaps be explained by policymakers, like Starmer’s aforementioned ‘thuggery’ comments, inability to view far-right violence as a legitimate security threat.
Conclusion: Future Policy
To combat the problem of increasing right-wing violence, policymakers should perhaps look to adopt more comprehensive legislation, particularly in digital regulation and social services.
Holding Social Media Companies Accountable
Although they are primarily private companies, these platforms arguably have a duty of care to prevent the dissemination of misinformation and harmful content, such as extremist views and hate speech. This can be achieved by implementing stronger regulatory standards. A few example practices may include stronger content moderation, more transparency regarding how algorithms prioritise user content, and more streamlined reporting methods for harmful content.
Reforming Counterterrorism Legislation
The limitations of UK’s counterterrorism legislation, particularly the Prevent strategy, should also be re-evaluated to account for the legitimate threat of far-right violence. This should primarily be done by recognising and reforming the current racial bias perpetuated by the strategy, as well as expanding its definition to include right-wing extremism.
Supporting Communities
Any efforts to combat far-right violence would also benefit from more long-term considerations that aim to bridge the social tensions that arise from such divisive sentiments. It is imperative that policymakers tackle the root causes of extremism, such as underlying social inequalities and attitudes, especially when trying to reduce the appeal of far-right sentiments among young people. For example, communities may benefit from increasing funding for job training and education initiatives, especially in economically deprived areas. Additionally, mandatory critical media literacy lessons could help people to recognise misinformation and manipulated narratives, which would help to build individual accountability.
Despite the chaos that unfolded this past summer, there remains hope for change. While many took to the streets to take part in the violent riots, thousands of others also turned out for counter-protests, denouncing the xenophobia and Islamophobia that had been incited and demonstrating a willingness to challenge the prejudices of extremist ideologies. By addressing the roots of right-wing extremism through policy reform, it’s more than possible for the UK to work toward a future that is safer for all.
Comments