DAVID SHIPLEY
It seems as though everyone is watching Adolescence this week. The four-part Netflix series tells the story of a 13 year-old white boy who murders a female classmate after having been radicalised by the ‘manosphere’. It’s beautifully shot and wonderfully acted. My mother has been texting me excitedly as she watches each episode. The star, Stephen Graham and writer Jack Thorne toured TV studios, calling for the show to be aired in schools and parliament, making it clear that they hope it “causes discussion and makes change“. Even the Prime Minister has got in on the act, saying that his family have been watching and that “the violence carried out by young men, influenced by what they see online, is a real problem”. Meanwhile the Culture Secretary, Lisa Nandy made it clear that the Government is
“pressing ahead with the Online Harms Act to make sure that we keep people safe online”.
As with ITV’s dramatisation of the Post Office Horizon scandal, it seems that a TV drama may again be changing Government policy. Except this time it’s a drama which is apparently either not based on any particular case, or informed by the murder of 15 year-old Elianne Andam by 17 year-old Hassan Sentamu. Unlike in Adolescence, Sentamu’s killing of Ellianne Andam followed a history of attacking girls, making repeated threats of violence and carrying knives, while his social media usage has not been linked to his crime. The reality is that there are usually escalating warning signs before boys and young men commit these kinds of murders – violent fantasies, violent behaviours and carrying knives are all common.
Many people online have also questioned the choice to make the killer a white boy, but this appears to be consistent with much official training provided by the state.
I watched a leaked Prevent training video which was part of Hampshire County Council’s safeguarding training until last month. It is a crude animation, telling the tale of ‘Mr J’, a 17 year-old boy who likes to spend time at his local nature reserve. It tells us that “nature reserve staff become concerned” when they discover leaflets Mr J has distributed which “contain anti-immigration views and argue that British tradition and identity is under threat from multiculturalism and that Islam is fundamentally opposed to British values”. Their concerns are further raised when they question Mr J, but find him to be “defensive and uncooperative”. The staff refer him to Prevent, who progress Mr J to the next step, “Channel”, which means a counter-terrorism police officer visits his home along with a social worker.
Contrast this scenario with that of Axel Rudakubana, the Southport killer, was never referred to Channel, despite having been expelled from school for bringing a knife in and for attacking another pupil.
A Hampshire County Council spokesperson said: “The video in question is no longer in use. The video referred to was one in a series previously used, with a range of case studies featuring hypothetical scenarios staff may have encountered. Since February Hampshire County Council uses training developed by the Home Office.”
But the council didn’t invent this narrative itself. I completed the first module of the Government’s official Prevent training, which describes “cultural nationalism” as an “extreme Right-wing terrorist” ideology. It specifically identifies the belief that “Western culture is under threat from mass migration and a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups” as a “narrative” of concern.
‘Kirsty’, a source within Hampshire County Council, said this video is typical of Prevent training. “They train us to look for factors that indicate radicalisation, but will only show us examples of young white men.” She believes that the focus of the training is misleading, with a great deal of attention give to examples of “incel lingo” such as “looksmaxxing”, imagery like Pepe the Frog being described as “online Right”, and very outdated Irish nationalist and animal liberation movements. Kirsty believes that “most people who attend the training would not think that these issues apply to young brown or black boys, or even girls” because “they just focus on Right wing ideology – there’s no branching out to Islamic extremism or eco terrorism”. She thinks this is because Right wing ideology is a “safe example for them to use because it’s politically correct”. All of this is happening against a background where Islamist terrorism comprises 75% of MI5’s caseload but only 11% of Prevent referrals are related to Islamist terrorism.
Professor Ian Acheson, a counter-terrorism expert says:
Art is not life, particularly when it comes to combating violent extremism. We know that all the data show the pre-eminent terrorist threat to national security in this country is from Islamist ideology. But this is never emphasised in fictional representations of the threat. The reason why is obvious and also dangerous. It’s far less trouble to exemplify an extreme Right-wing risk that exists mainly in the heads of progressive professionals. While this can make for compelling viewing or great educational tools, it also adds to the feeling that simple cowardice is in the director’s chair.
Yet again the arms of the state seem focused on that which is easy to ‘confront’, rather than that which poses the greatest risk to its citizens. As with the murder of Sir David Amess by an Islamist, so now a drama is being used as an excuse to further restrict online speech.
David Shipley has sold fork lift trucks, worked in corporate finance, produced a film and served a prison sentence for committing fraud. He now campaigns for prison reform and works as a prison inspector. You can find his website here.
This article (White Boys Blamed Again) was created and published by Daily Sceptic and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author David Shipley
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply