The spat between Theresa May and Michael Gove over the notorious ‘Trojan Horse’ plot in Birmingham has exposed a rift that’s been at the heart of the counter-extremism debate for years.
At the heart of the matter is a debate over when is the best time to intervene in the radicalisation process. Some, like May, argue that extremism is only a problem when it becomes violent, and therefore we should only tackle its violent manifestations. Others, such as Gove, believe extremism should always be tackled, violent or not.
Those who hold the former opinion tend to promote working with non-violent extremists in order to deter their more aggressive comrades. This tactic is based on the assumption that non-violent extremists are best-placed to de-radicalise the violent ones. It can certainly work in some settings, but it is nowhere near fool-proof, largely because it confuses de-radicalisation with counter-extremism.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in