WIREDGOV

Over the last couple of weeks, the UK has witnessed an apparent boiling over of far-right extremism in the form of violent rioting across the country. However, perhaps a more honest acknowledgement of the simmering levels of hate in both online and offline rhetoric will leave people less surprised by the recent scenes.

Policymakers, security actors and academics have shared concerns over the last several years about rising levels of far-right extremism in the UK and abroad. These questions have now been accentuated by the rapid escalation of far right-motivated violence and protesting following the Southport mass stabbing, in which three young girls were killed. Scenes from the towns to which the rioters have been flocking highlight just how deep the challenge runs. 

These scenes also highlight how essential it is to address the underlying drivers of far-right extremism within society and the structural and institutional racism that sometimes supports and coheres with such ideological viewpoints, as well as the suitability and effectiveness of responses to this form of extremism. It is difficult to look within and navigate how commonly held biases and discriminatory views such as racism, sexism and xenophobia shape perceptions of and responses to far-right extremism.

The Threat of Normalised Hate and Discrimination

The riots are a stark reminder of the dangers posed by the normalisation of hateful ideologies. These ideologies – white supremacy, misogyny, xenophobia and others – have simmered beneath the surface of society for years, often dismissed or ignored until they erupt into violence. The Southport incident acted as a catalyst, much like similar situations in Ireland and other parts of Europe, where attacks on vulnerable groups have led to widespread unrest.

The persistence and sometimes even active government stoking of anti-migrant rhetoric and sentiment in the UK is particularly concerning. Despite previous incidents, such as the firebombing of a migrant processing centre in Dover and other attacks on facilities housing asylum seekers, these threats have not been given the serious attention they deserve, which allows such sentiments to thrive and spread. When these issues are not addressed, there can be a reduction in resilience to violent extremism, as seen in the recent riots. 

Far-right actors combine legitimate criticisms of poorly managed migrant accommodation with dangerous conspiracy theories, stoking fears of cultural erosion and economic displacement

Far-right actors have skilfully exploited legitimate concerns, weaving them into their broader narratives of fear and division to advance their agendas. One example of this co-option by far-right extremists is around the management and cost of migrant and refugee accommodation. The use of hotels as long-term accommodation for migrants and refugees is far from ideal, as there can be overcrowding, isolation and a lack of integration opportunities. Moreover, the lack of clear communication from authorities about the housing of migrants has fuelled frustration and suspicion among local communities. Thus, far-right actors combine legitimate criticisms of poorly managed accommodation with dangerous conspiracy theories, such as the Great Replacement theory and the idea of an orchestrated 'population exchange', stoking fears of cultural erosion and economic displacement. 

They have also been able to capitalise on the understandable outpouring of grief and emotion at the killing of three young girls in Southport, conflating this with gendered and racialised narratives projecting British women and children as vulnerable to ‘other’ migrant men. Far-right actors have successfully radicalised and recruited around similar narratives in the past.

The Role of Far-Right Personalities and Groups in the Riots 

Far-right groups including White Lives Matter and Identity England and influencers such as Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley Lennon) and Andrew Tate were easily able to mine the narratives outlined above to normalise the riots as a justified response by the ‘British’ people. They were also able to share information about protest locations and disinformation around the identity of the Southport attacker.

Two themes were useful for their efforts: the defence of free speech and the reframing of the riots as not ‘far-right’ but justified ‘resistance’ by those at breaking point. Tommy Robinson has asserted his role as that of a genuine journalist, a source of truth contrasting with the bias of mainstream news. This was a theme reprised by Andrew Tate, whose online video rants frequently name as an enemy the nebulous ‘matrix’ of elite power actors, including the media, police and states. X CEO Elon Musk also responded, normalising far-right influencers as voices of ‘truth’ and ‘freedom’ in contrast to elected leaders.

Machismo is a useful tool here. Both Tate and Robinson have voiced the need for ‘real men’ – versus liberal emasculated politicians such as Prime Minister Keir Starmer – to work out, to ready themselves for what is to come. The message is of the need for brave authentic male truthtellers to protect women and children from immigrants, as the emasculated state will not. 

The Importance of the Narrative – Online and Offline

Far-right personalities and groups have disseminated narratives and rallied support, polarising public opinion by utilising social media to facilitate massive reach. By spreading false claims about the attacker's identity and motives, these actors have been able to amplify existing anxieties and channel them into anger and violence based on a deliberate distortion of reality that is designed to provoke an emotional response and mobilise support for extremist causes. Certainly not all the people that participated in the protests adhere to a violent extremist ideology. However, the normalisation of hate in society lowers resilience to wider cohorts being swept along by far-right extremist motivators.

When racism, misogyny and xenophobia are treated as fringe issues rather than core societal problems, they can become embedded in the public consciousness. This makes it easier for extremist ideologies to take root and grow, as they are seen as acceptable or even justified by some segments of the population. This normalisation process has been subtle but insidious, allowing far-right narratives to seep into mainstream discussions and influence public opinion.

The result is a dangerous cycle where discriminatory sentiments become increasingly normalised, drawing upon societal grievances and creating an environment in which far-right ideologies can flourish. Social media and other online spaces are often used as a tool to facilitate the spread. This environment can then be stoked by bad actors who are simply trying to deepen the chaos to weaken their opponents. The ultimate result is a spillover of violence. 

When racism, misogyny and xenophobia are treated as fringe issues rather than core societal problems, they can become embedded in the public consciousness

All of this emphasises the power of the narrative. There is a long-running history of politicians, security services, the media and others downplaying far right-motivated violence, calling it ‘thuggery’ instead of labelling it extremism in the same manner as other ideological motivators. This not only masks the societal and institutional allowances sometimes given to far-right sentiment, but it also overlooks the organised, networked and ideological components of both the riots and the individuals and groups involved.  Connections extend beyond the borders of the UK and are often spread through shared narratives like those mentioned above, creating a transnational environment that normalises hate-based discrimination and allows the spread of extremist ideology. 

Changing the Narrative and Normalising Inclusivity

To effectively counter this threat, it is essential to address the root causes of far-right sentiments and challenge the status quo narrative. Acknowledging the legitimate concerns of communities – whether they stem from economic insecurity, cultural changes or mismanaged migration policies – is a necessary first step. Disenfranchised communities need to believe that the government and not just the far right is listening. 

However, it is equally important to firmly reject the underlying discrimination and extremist ideologies that attempt to hijack these discussions and offer harmful 'solutions'. Narrative change must be enforced across politics, media and societal influencers, and in the calm between storms as well as during crises. A good example of this is coverage of how communities came out to help clean up in the aftermath of the riots and call for inclusivity. 

Extremist threats are not all the same and will require different types of approaches to tackle them effectively, but this begins with acknowledging far-right violence as extremism and challenging the normalised hate that can reduce societal resilience to far-right extremism. 

The views expressed in this Commentary are the authors’, and do not represent those of RUSI or any other institution.

Have an idea for a Commentary you’d like to write for us? Send a short pitch to commentaries@rusi.org and we’ll get back to you if it fits into our research interests. Full guidelines for contributors can be found here.