The British government’s Prevent program, created to combat terrorism, has come under fire for labeling “cultural nationalism” and concerns over mass migration as signs of right-wing extremist ideology. The latest guidelines warn that viewing Western culture as “under threat” from immigration may indicate potential terrorism—a move critics say targets lawful conservative thought.
The controversial classification is part of online training provided to public-sector workers—teachers, doctors, and civil servants—who are legally required to report signs of radicalization. In its course materials, Prevent grouped cultural nationalism with white supremacy and ethno-nationalism, defining it as the belief that mass migration and poor integration are threatening Western identity.
Critics argue this broadens Prevent’s scope to include lawful conservative views, hampering its core mission and leading to false referrals. William Shawcross, who authored a 2023 independent review of the program, warned Prevent is disproportionately flagging right-leaning individuals while failing to act effectively on Islamist threats. Shawcross noted that every terrorist attack in the UK since the start of his review has been Islamist in nature, yet right-wing concerns dominate Prevent referrals.
The issue gained renewed attention following the 2023 stabbing attack in Southport by Axel Rudakubana, a known Prevent subject who had been reported multiple times but dismissed by authorities. The attack left three young girls dead and ten others injured, raising questions about the program’s ability to identify real threats.
Lord Young of Acton, founder of the Free Speech Union, criticized the inclusion of cultural nationalism in a letter to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. He warned that this could lead to the unjust referral of individuals for holding mainstream, right-of-center views, including members of Parliament and public figures.
Young emphasized that classifying such political beliefs as terrorism-adjacent could severely damage careers, reputations, and civil liberties. He cited recent remarks from Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and former immigration minister Robert Jenrick as examples of statements that now risk falling under suspicion.
The Home Office responded by claiming Prevent does not restrict free speech but is designed to protect those vulnerable to radicalization. However, with the program’s failure to prevent known threats and growing reports of overreach, calls are increasing for reform or full overhaul.
