What should a country such as Aotearoa New Zealand do to protect itself?
Since moving from the UK to Aotearoa New Zealand over five years ago, I am often asked for my perspectives on societal and cultural inclusion issues that occur in the UK. Over the last two weeks, I have been routinely asked the following questions:
1. Has there always been such a large right-wing extremist presence in the UK?
2. Can liberal democracies like New Zealand protect themselves against ‘entrenched’ right-wing extremism?
Has there always been such a large right-wing extremist presence in the UK?
The UK has struggled to reconcile itself with its colonial past and its position as head of the Commonwealth, particularly since the late1940s. Post the Second World War, the UK scoured the Commonwealth regions like the Caribbean, looking for workers to help build key infrastructure, such as the National Health Service (NHS) and the public transport system. Those who left their homeland to answer the call from the so-called ‘Motherland’ (which included my parents) were surprised when in the main they were greeted with hostility, and both civil and institutional racism and discrimination.
Prominent politicians of the day, for example, Enoch Powell(who held two Cabinet positions), spoke out against what they regarded as ‘mass migration and the ‘dilution’ of Britishness’. Powell is perhaps best remembered for his "Rivers of Blood" speech delivered on 20th April 1968. In that speech, he expressed his strong opposition to immigration and predicted dire consequences for ‘White People’ if immigration continued. Powell’s speech, which demonized people on the basis of skin colour (non-white), was seen by many as legitimising racism towards non-white people. His incendiary rhetoric led to a significant increase in tension between the respective communities, resulting in numerous race riots and protests.
Powell’s speech had a profound impact in that it polarised public opinion in the UK, legitimised the criticism of immigrants and established immigration as a major political issue, which in turn helped to establish right-wing extremist parties such as the National Front (1967), whose politics focused almost exclusively on immigration and race. Due to the UK’s‘ First past the post’ election system, the National Front never had electoral success at general elections, however they were more successful at local council level, where at their height they won 43 council seats. It could be argued that the National Front’s biggest impact was getting mainstream parties, particularly those on the Centre Right, to harden their position on immigration and use the same narrative as the National Front, albeit more nuanced and less incendiary. Whether it is Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak, immigration and immigrants have all too often been portrayed as a negative and made a scapegoat for everything ranging from, for example, longer hospital waiting lists, lack of affordable housing and crime, despite evidence to the contrary. Immigration and race in the UK, particularly since Brexit, is now a highly politicised issue. The recent July (2024) general election in the UK saw Farage’s Reform Party get over 14% of the electoral vote (4 million plus votes), coming in second place in nearly 100 constituencies and returning 5 MPs(historic for a newly formed party). Whilst the language used by Farage and his Reform Party is not as blatantly incendiary as that used by Enoch Powell, it is however aggressively anti-immigration (particularly towards those from non-European countries) and along the same lines as his former party, the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which blamed immigration and demonised particularly non-European migrants, which in turn was a significant reason for why many in the UK voted for Brexit.
Successive UK governments have unfortunately been ‘asleep at the wheel’ when it comes to right-wing extremism. They have instead pandered to right-wing populism, partly fuelled by the media’s disproportionate focus on so-called Islamic extremism. Consequently, right-wing extremism has been allowed to grow under the banner of free speech, and unincumbered by the kind of media or political scrutiny applied to so-called Islamic extremism. Anti-immigration/immigrant rhetoric routinely being used by the mainstream parties is no longer generally regarded as racist or racialism. Given this situation, it was not surprising to see thousands of racists promote lies on social media and use the tragic events in Southport as an excuse to bring widespread racist violence to streets across the UK.
Can liberal democracies like New Zealand protect themselves against ‘entrenched’ right-wing extremism?
As someone who is general optimistic, I want to believe that philosophically liberal democracies like Aotearoa New Zealand can protect itself from entrenched right-wing extremism. However, only if it is prepared, ironically, not to be too liberal and allow racialism to be excused under the banner of freedom of speech. Many on the political right argue that immigration– and by implication race – is a legitimate political concern of people in society, which is true. However, this is largely because politicians and other societal influencers have used race and immigration for their own political purposes in a rather simplistic and populist manner, routinely overstating the negative impact, whilst ignoring the positives. Many so-called liberal democracies currently have right-wing governments, which in the main have taken on the rhetoric of more extremist groups within their respective countries, mainstreaming what would have previously been seen as racism and racialism into now legitimate political debate. My concern is that the political and societal racialist rhetoric in the UK that fuelled the far-right extremist violence across the UK, is increasingly finding its way into New Zealand’s political discourse through, for example, attacks on the importance and centrality of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the role of Te Ao Māori.
Large scale right-wing racist violence has now largely dissipated due to a combination of effective political leadership by Sir Keir Starmer’s government, responsive policing, swift action by the courts and the mobilisation of people opposed to racism within their communities. The racists who came out onto the streets, or on social media, in support of racially motivated violence and destruction of property will now slip back into civic society.
The challenge for liberal democracies is how they go about exercising responsible control over right-wing extremism, social media giants and the likes of Elon Musk who are playing an increasing role in fomenting societal division through the use of disinformation (lies) and irresponsible rhetoric (Musk, “Civil war is inevitable”). In my view, freedom of speech should not be regarded as so inviolate that when it’s practiced, it results in the unjustified dehumanisation of others.
Earle Wilkes, Equity Matters Limited
