Citizen's Duty

The British government has described non-violent extremism thus: "vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs". On this basis schools, universities, NHS trusts, local authorities and prisons will be placed under a statutory duty to prevent extremist radicalisation taking place within their walls. In the current climate of our society, you are what you say as well as what you do.

On the face of it I agree with the opinion that citizens should not indulge in extremism and that secular values should be encouraged. However, will it not be counterproductive to censor or "blacklist" individuals who express opinions which fall within the definition? We all have a duty to promote non-violent political activity and those who deliberately provoke others to behave violently towards political or religious opponents or commit treason should be sanctioned. However, we cannot challenge "extremist" ideas if such ideas are only held or expressed in private. Those who are potentially violent will simply keep their mouths shut with the aim of not arousing suspicion.

Some proponents of religious or political change could feel resentment that they cannot express their views in public and may turn to violent organisations to vent their anger.

We live in a free society and open debate is necessary to defend our values of liberty, openness and free thinking.

Of course there is a fine line between expressing "extremist" views and inciting others to violence or even being violent but we must be careful not to sanction those who have not crossed that line.

We really should be able to recognise the difference between the expression of an opinion and taking violent action or inciting violence.

I find the extreme views of  some of our fellow citizens abhorrent especially with regard to proposing violence. There is, however, a difference between actually taking action or inciting someone rather than just talking and being offensive.

Some politicians have proposed taking military action without consent from the United Nations should their views be considered as extremist? Should they be put on a blacklist?

You have the right to openly propose changes to the law that go against the grain of British values , if you so wish. You have this right but you do not have the right to impose extra-judicial punishments on those who do not agree with your moral or ethical standards.

You have the right to oppose a secular democracy and the right to express the view that Britain should become a theocracy or a republic. However, you do not have the right to impose any of this  without the democratic consent of the majority of the British people.

We would live in a better society if everyone recognised democracy and secular values and we were allowed to express non-violent opinions freely.