Understanding extremism in Scotland: public sector practitioner perceptions and views
Findings from research exploring public sector practitioner understandings and experiences of extremism in Scotland.
4. Views on extremism in Scotland
4.1. Introduction
This section will address the following research questions:
- To what extent do public sector practitioners perceive extremism to be a threat or problem in Scotland? Do they feel that this has changed over time?
- How do public sector practitioners perceive extremism in Scotland to manifest as views, behaviours and actions, particularly in the communities they work in?
- What are public sector practitioners’ views on the ideologies or types of extremism that are of most concern or growing concern currently, and why? What are views on the key sources / drivers of these concerns?
- Do public sector practitioners working in different areas of Scotland or with different communities diverge in how they perceive current threats?
- How has the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns had an impact on what public sector practitioners are seeing in terms of spread of ideologies?
In qualitative discussions, participants were asked to what extent they considered extremism to be a problem in Scotland and in their local areas, and whether they felt this has changed over time. Participants were also asked what types of extremist ideologies they think are present in Scotland, whether this varies (e.g., by region) or has changed over time (including as a result of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns).
In the survey, respondents were asked for their views on the extent of the problem of extremism on a scale from ‘no problem at all’ to ‘a big problem’ (with an option for ‘don’t know’) in their local area, Scotland, the rest of the UK and worldwide. Subsequently, respondents were asked the extent to which they feel the threat from extremism has increased or decreased in Scotland in the last five years.
Participants in both the qualitative discussions and the survey were also prompted with a list of groups which could potentially be viewed as extremist. In qualitative discussions, researchers probed around views on the perceived prevalence of the listed groups in Scotland. In the survey, respondents were asked to rate the extent of each in Scotland from ‘no problem at all’ to ‘a big problem’ (with an option for ‘don’t know’).
This section will first examine public sector practitioner perceptions of the prevalence of extremism in Scotland, followed by perceptions of the changing picture of extremism in Scotland, then an exploration of perceptions of the types of extremist ideology present in Scotland, including detail from practitioner experiences of extremism, followed by conclusions.
4.2. Perceived prevalence of extremism in Scotland
While public sector practitioners broadly felt that extremism exists in Scotland, it was viewed as less of a problem in Scotland than in the rest of the UK or the world. Practitioners were more likely to answer ‘don’t know’ when asked about the extent to which extremism is a problem in their local area or Scotland more widely. This was particularly the case for public sector practitioners who were less familiar with Prevent in their work.
Q6. How much of a problem do you consider extremism to be in the following places?
Base: All respondents, n=492.
In the survey, almost all public sector practitioners saw extremism as a problem (to some degree) in Scotland (88%), in the rest of the UK (93%) and worldwide (94%). A smaller majority (63%) saw extremism as a problem in their local areas, while over a fifth (22%) felt it was not a problem in their local area at all.
The perceived scale of the problem of extremism in Scotland was far smaller than in the rest of the UK, with nearly nine in ten (86%) seeing extremism as a big or moderate problem in the rest of the UK, compared with half (51%) for Scotland. In the qualitative research, public sector practitioners often compared Scotland to England, particularly larger English cities such as London and Manchester. Many, especially public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles, could more easily point to examples of extremism in England than in Scotland.
This reflected the reasonably high level of uncertainty when it comes to the level of extremism in public sector practitioners’ own local areas in the survey (with 14% saying ‘don’t know’) or Scotland (with 10% saying ‘don’t know’). This was particularly true of those who either had not heard of Prevent or did not feel it was part of their role. A quarter (25%) of this group answered ‘don’t know’ when asked about the extent of extremism in their local area and 17% when asked about Scotland. In contrast, their levels of uncertainty about extremism in the rest of the UK and worldwide were similar to those who felt Prevent was part of their role.
In qualitative discussions, where participants were unsure of the extent of the problem of extremism in their local areas or in Scotland (which were more likely to be practitioners without Prevent-related roles) they often turned to what they had heard in the media. This tended to be stories of extremism in England or worldwide, particularly Islamist extremism, rather than examples from within Scotland.
“In the Borders we don’t tend to think about it very much. If something happens in London or abroad, yes it brings it back into attention but I wouldn’t say it’s the focus here, I haven’t thought about it every day. I think about it when I see the news.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Health and social care, Mini focus group)
“When terrorist attacks happen, they want the biggest coverage, so they target well known places like London and Manchester.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, Paired in-depth interview)
In contrast, public sector practitioners in Prevent-managerial roles were more likely to see extremism as a problem in Scotland and in the area they work in (detailed figures for each of these questions are covered below). In qualitative discussions, public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles spoke far more confidently about the existence of extremism in Scotland and were able to talk in more depth on the topic.
Q6. How much of a problem do you consider extremism to be in the following places?
Base: All respondents, n=492; Practitioners who have heard of Prevent and see it as part of their role, n=380; Practitioners who have not heard of Prevent or do not see it as part of their role, n=88; Practitioners with Prevent managerial roles, n=142; Practitioners with Prevent non-managerial roles, n=350.
Almost all public sector practitioners who saw Prevent as part of their role (90%), or who were in a Prevent managerial role (meaning they managed or coordinated responses to Prevent concerns; 96%) saw extremism as a problem in Scotland. In comparison, four fifths (80%) of public sector practitioners who had not heard of Prevent, or did not see it as part of their role, and 85% of those in Prevent non-managerial roles, saw extremism as a problem in Scotland.
Nevertheless, few respondents considered extremism to be a big problem in Scotland. Of those who saw Prevent as part of their role, half (50%) said that extremism was a moderate (rather than big or minor) problem in Scotland. This reflects the sentiment heard from many public sector practitioners in the qualitative research that while extremism exists in Scotland, the problem is not as serious as in other places.
Similarly, when public sector practitioners were asked to what extent they considered extremism to be a problem in their local area, those who saw Prevent as part of their role (68%), or had Prevent managerial roles (75%), were more likely to see extremism as a problem, compared with those who had not heard of Prevent or did not see it as part of their role (42%) or those in Prevent non-managerial roles (59%). Overall, extremism was viewed as an even smaller problem in local areas than in wider Scotland, with over half (51%) of those who see Prevent as part of their roles considering it as only a minor problem.
Q6. How much of a problem do you consider extremism to be in the following places?
Base: All respondents, n=492; Public sector practitioners who work primarily in an urban area, n=178; Public sector practitioners who primarily work in a rural area, n=148.
Public sector practitioners in the qualitative and quantitative research viewed extremism as more likely to be encountered in urban areas. Practitioners working in rural areas were more likely to see extremism as a moderate rather than minor problem compared with those in urban areas. Over half (54%) in rural areas (compared with 41% in urban areas) saw extremism as a moderate problem, and only a quarter (26%) (compared with 42% in urban areas) a minor problem.
The perception that extremism is more likely to be encountered in urban areas was held both by those working in urban and in rural areas. In the survey, two thirds (66%) of those working in urban areas saw extremism as a problem in their area compared with 57% of those in rural areas (Figure 6). Additionally, public sector practitioners in rural areas were much more likely to answer ‘don’t know’ when asked about the extent of the problem (18%) compared with urban (11%) or mixed or suburban public sector practitioners (15%).
The reasons given for this varied. They included the perception that there is greater opportunity for extremism to develop in areas of larger population; the higher levels of deprivation in cities (which is perceived as a risk factor for vulnerability to being drawn into extremism in section 3.5); and more ethnically ‘mixed’ communities. On the latter, there was a sense from some that this could lead to tension and hate crimes, while a minority made a link between extremism and ethnic minority and immigrant populations, as is explored in section 4.4).
4.3. Views on the changing picture of extremism in Scotland
There was overwhelming consensus that the threat from extremism has increased in Scotland over the past five years. In the survey, most public sector practitioners (64%) felt the threat has increased, compared with only 5% who felt it has decreased. Public sector practitioners were much more likely to feel the threat has increased a little (48%), rather than a lot (15%).
Q7. In the last five years, do you think the threat from extremism has increased or decreased in Scotland?
Base: All respondents, n=492.
Public sector practitioners with experience of Prevent in their roles were more likely to say the threat from extremism has increased in the last five years than those without experience of Prevent (71% compared with 60%). Conversely, those without experience were approximately twice as likely to say they did not know whether the threat had changed than those with experience (12% compared with 7%).
This supports findings from the qualitative research. Public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles tended to see extremism as a problem in Scotland, and immediately noted that the problem was increasing.
These public sector practitioners pointed to young people spending more time online as a key cause of this increase in extremism. Social media in particular was seen as a ‘breeding ground’ for extremism where young people can pick up extremist views and be manipulated into taking or supporting violent action. Some felt there had been an increase in people being radicalised since the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns, speculating that people may have felt more isolated, and that young people would have been spending more time online while not in school.
“Online forums are a breeding ground for extreme views and the logarithms [sic] in your computer emphasise that and you’re down a rabbit hole of repeating opinions with no balanced view. I think it will increase. People spend so much time online now and people will say far more extreme things online than face to face.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Local authority, In-depth interview)
“That’s the kind of thing that does concern me, that you’re going to get vulnerable people who can be easily manipulated on social media... It’s not kind of, you know, have six political meetings and then build a bomb, and blow something up. It’s somebody somewhere else, maybe not even in the same country, getting a 14-year-old to go and set fire to a building. That’s where I think you’re going to find most extremism now.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Primary / secondary education, In-depth interview)
However, there was a sense among some public sector practitioners familiar with Prevent that any increase in referrals could be in part due to increasing awareness of Prevent rather than a reflection of an increase in extremism. For example, some thought that increases in referrals might happen as a result of increased practitioner awareness about what extremism looks like and what a practitioner should do if they come across someone vulnerable to extremism.
“The Prevent guidance only came out last March so lots of local authorities haven’t implemented Prevent into their safeguarding role or been through a PMAP process with particular individuals. It’s difficult to gauge what [extremism] looks like in Scotland when the guidance is so premature... I think there’s lots [of extremism] out there but more Prevent training delivered will mean more Prevent referrals.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Local authority, In-depth interview)
4.4. Views on the types of extremist attitudes, beliefs or ideologies present in Scotland
Participants in both the qualitative discussions and the survey were prompted with a list of groups. This list was drawn from the work of Michalski (2019), who examined 8,000 terrorist attacks that took place in the UK and the US between 1970 and 2017 and classified them according to their underlying motivation. The groups he identified included:
- Anarchists or anti-government agitators
- Animal rights or environmentalists
- Anti-abortionists
- Leftists or Marxist groups
- Nationalists or separatists
- Racists or hate groups
- Radical Islamist extremists
- Right-wing extremists, religious or otherwise
- Promoters of sectarian violence
This list reflects the ideologies and motivations which underpinned the terror incidents examined by Michalski (2019), but not all groups who adhere to these ideologies or who hold these beliefs are necessarily extremist in nature. Michalski’s (2019) list was used to prompt discussion among participants, and is not indicative of the officially adopted position of the Scottish Government, or the view of the researchers. The list was adapted for the purposes of this research, with the addition of ‘incels’[10] and small changes to the language used.
It is important to note that the use of a prompted list may have increased the likelihood of public sector practitioners to define specific ideologies as extremist. For example, some participants may not have defined sectarian or certain racist beliefs as being extremist if they had not been prompted with these beliefs as part of a broader list of extremist views.
Almost all public sector practitioners said that racists or hate groups (92%) and sectarian groups (91%) were a problem in Scotland. Sectarian groups were seen as the biggest problem, with over three quarters (77%) considering these as a big or moderate problem in Scotland, followed by over two thirds (69%) considering racists or hate groups as a big or moderate problem in Scotland.
After racism and sectarianism, extreme nationalist or separatist groups were seen as a problem by 85% of public sector practitioners, right-wing extremism by 84% of public sector practitioners and Islamist extremism by 81% of public sector practitioners.
Q8. How much of a problem do you consider the following to be in Scotland?
Base: All respondents, n=492.
Sectarianism
When asked about sectarianism, almost all public sector practitioners who took part in the qualitative research talked about intra-Christian sectarianism. This was often from experience in their personal lives if they lived in areas where it is prevalent, or from hearing stories in the media if they did not, as opposed to experience in their professional lives.
Most initially linked sectarianism to extremism, although in general, they did not deem their own experience of sectarianism severe enough to be a Prevent concern. In contrast, others brought sectarianism up only when prompted with a list of groups, rather than initially associating it with extremism. This was especially true of public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles who had more experience of extremism in their work. Research previously carried out by the Scottish Government highlighted that there is evidence to suggest that pockets of sectarianism exist in Scotland, with more violent and extreme forms concentrated in particular areas (Scottish Government, 2015).
Despite not always being immediately associated with extremism, there was a strong sense amongst participants that sectarianism is pervasive, and that it has been widespread in Scotland for a significant period of time. However, some participants felt that sectarianism had declined in severity, and linked this to the end of the violent conflict in Northern Ireland in the late 1990s. Practitioners believed that sectarianism rarely leads to violence in Scotland today. This led to many seeing it as commonplace, but less of a problem than previously. In line with the strong link participants drew between violence and extremism, this meant participants were less likely to classify it as extremist.
“Sectarianism has calmed down, it’s not the issue it was before.”
(Practitioner without Prevent-related role, Primary / secondary education, Mini focus group)
“Sectarianism is probably, in today’s context, largely a form of discrimination. Historically, it has precipitated violent actions. Northern Ireland comes to mind and some of that is still simmering. At that time, that was extremism, that bred terrorist actions and violence. But sectarianism now is less extreme in my view.”
(Practitioner with Prevent-related role, Health and social care, In-depth interview)
Sectarianism was seen to be most prevalent in the West of Scotland and particularly Glasgow. The survey found that public sector practitioners working in Glasgow and Strathclyde were indeed most likely to see sectarianism as a big problem, with half (51%) seeing it this way, compared with the average of 37%. In the qualitative discussions some spoke about sectarianism in terms of Protestants and Catholics, but for most it was more strongly linked to the ‘Old Firm’[11] football rivalry in Glasgow. This rivalry was seen to be present not only in football matches, but in conversations in everyday life with family, friends and colleagues.
When asked in the survey, ‘What experience, if any, have you had with extremism as part of your work?’ a small minority (7%) reported experiences relating to sectarism. Of all the attitudes, beliefs or ideologies cited in relation to this question, sectarianism was the most common. As noted above, sectarian groups were also seen as the most prevalent problem in Scotland, with 77% of survey respondents viewing this group as a big or moderate problem in Scotland. To a small extent, then, this perception of prevalence may be linked to an experience in work, but from qualitative discussions it appeared that experiences in participants’ personal lives (most often relating to football) were more likely to shape their views of sectarianism.
When participants talked about experiences of sectarianism in the workplace, these were often linked to football, such as witnessing sectarian views expressed at football matches when policing them (often through chants, with alcohol seen as a catalyst for problematic behaviour), or general comments, whether from colleagues or the general public, relating to football teams. However, participants also mentioned other experiences such as policing marches and parades (e.g., the Orange Walk), hearing sectarian comments not related to football, or seeing tattoos relating to sectarian groups.
“Sectarianism is something living within the West of Scotland which continues to be an issue. Working in education you sometimes hear comments which reflect an opinion held at home.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent non-managerial role, Primary / secondary education, Survey)
“Sectarian staff members using the disguise of ‘banter’ to say derogatory things about Catholics or people they assume to be Catholic because of the football team they openly support.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent non-managerial role, Scottish Prisons Service, Survey)
Participants were divided in their views as to whether expressions of sectarianism constituted extremism or not. While some felt they did as they demonstrated intolerance of other groups, others felt this was generally linked to football, and therefore surface level, or just harmless ‘banter’, rather than reflecting deeply-held beliefs or prejudices. On rare occasions, sectarianism was seen to lead to violence, usually relating to football, such as fighting at a football match. This, for many, was where it may more definitively cross into extremism.
“With extremism there are more victims, it could be fatal. Sectarianism is wrong, but it can be just words, and often people don’t know what they’re saying… historically, it all comes from a dark place, but in today’s world, my experience is people say words they don’t really understand, it’s just because they support a team or something, they don’t intend to really harm people.”
(Practitioner without Prevent-related role, Scottish Prisons Service, In-depth interview)
“With sectarian violence and prejudice, that has probably become more normalised over time, and now is just accepted as football rivalry, when in actual fact it’s rooted in something more sinister.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)
Racism
Most public sector practitioners also spoke about the prevalence of racism in Scotland. The proportion of participants who said they had experienced racism in their work was similar to those who had encountered sectarianism through work (6% compared with 7%).
When detailing their experiences of extremism, participants who mentioned racism generally pointed to racist comments they had heard either from the public or colleagues. Less frequently, public sector practitioners mentioned witnessing racially motivated violence, or dealing with a member of the public who had committed such violence.
“Supervising people who have been violent towards people based on racial prejudice.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent non-managerial role, Local authority, Survey)
“Verbal only, occasional refusal by public to consult with professional of non-white race. Occasional comments from non-white colleagues about racist comments towards them.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent non-managerial role, Local authority, Survey)
As with sectarianism, the perceived prevalence of racism contributed to some practitioners struggling to determine the extent to which racism was an extremist problem. This difficulty was especially pronounced when it came to racism related to far-right views. These views were definitively considered to be a form of extremism by those who spoke about them, with far-right views often seen as an extremist expression of racism. However, practitioners struggled to define the boundary between racism and extremism; for example, some asked when an offensive racist comment becomes an extremist one.
In the survey, there was a pronounced difference between the proportion of public sector practitioners who saw extremism as a big problem in Scotland (5%), and the proportion who saw sectarianism or racism as a big problem in Scotland (37% and 21% respectively). This suggests that the majority of public sector practitioners do not view these groups as extremist. This may be driven by a perception that sectarianism and racism are more commonplace in Scottish society.
“Working with older adults, you hear racist views frequently, but never enough to pass on concerns or think of extremism as they are unlikely to act on it in a violent way or share their views.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent managerial role, Local authority, Survey)
“Certainly, where I live there isn’t a great deal [of extremism]. That may be different elsewhere. There’s more sectarianism going on.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)
Public sector practitioners also felt that these issues would be difficult to completely eradicate. This appeared to be due to their perceived prevalence and scale, as well as a desire to focus on attitudes, beliefs or ideologies that were seen as more extreme, such as Islamist extremism or, for practitioners with greater experience of extremism and Prevent in their work, right-wing extremism.
There was a sense that racism and sectarianism were not usually seen to lead to violence, which many felt was a key component of extremism. Almost by definition of their pervasiveness, racism and sectarianism were seen to exist in society without leading to violence most of the time. In contrast, Islamist extremism was seen to be less prevalent in Scotland, but most associations with it assumed that it would lead to violence.
“Racism will always be an issue, but again that’s also getting better and I’m not seeing it as a big problem anymore.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Scottish Prisons Service, In-depth interview)
“It’s always been there. If you go to a Rangers / Celtic game, there are huge numbers of fans chanting sectarian abuse that is probably seen as too many people to arrest at that given time.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)
“I don’t see [extremism] as a massive problem in Scotland. Are people racist? Absolutely. Are they sectarian? Absolutely. But thank God up until now there seems to be a lack of real appetite to go from bigotry and sectarianism to something that is much worse and has a violent aspect to it, and also an organised aspect to it.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Further / Higher education, In-depth interview)
Right-wing extremism
Most public sector practitioners saw all of the listed groups as a problem. However, right-wing extremism was seen as a far smaller problem in Scotland than racism and sectarianism. Only 14% of public sector practitioners saw right-wing extremists as a big problem, compared with 37% for sectarian groups and 21% for racists or hate groups.
Despite this, when right-wing extremism was discussed in the qualitative research, it was seen more definitively as a form of extremism than racism or sectarianism where it did exist, as the views were seen to be less commonplace and were also seen as more likely to lead to violence.
In the qualitative research, public sector practitioners with Prevent-related roles felt that right-wing extremism was the main form of extremism present in Scotland today. Usually, they were drawing from their own experience, often the experience of seeing Prevent referrals for right-wing extremism increase. Participants believed that young people spending an increasing amount of time online was an important causal factor in increasing right-wing extremism. As discussed earlier, this was considered to be a crucial space where extremism is spread, particularly right-wing extremism.
In contrast, public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles were far less likely to mention right-wing extremism or to be able to talk about it in detail. Those without direct experience of Prevent were more likely to draw on examples of extremism covered in the media (particularly Islamist extremism).
“Right-wing extremism is massively on the rise. Percentage wise there has been an increase of 400%. In the last 3 years, we’ve gone from 3 cases to 48. That’s a massive increase. It is a problem.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Primary / secondary education, In-depth interview)
“Right-wing is on the rise. That’s what we’ve seen here. Of 11 referrals, 10 were right-wing.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Local authority, In-depth interview)
The survey found that public sector practitioners who see Prevent as part of their role (although not necessarily having a designated Prevent element to their role – see section 6.3 for more detail) were more likely to consider right-wing extremism to be a problem (87%), and in particular a big or moderate problem (56%), than public sector practitioners who had not heard of Prevent or did not see it as part of their role (75% and 44% respectively). The latter were twice as likely to answer ‘don’t know’ when asked about the extent of the problem of right-wing extremism in Scotland (22% compared with 11% of public sector practitioners who see Prevent as part of their role).
A very small proportion (4%) of the sample reported experiences of right-wing extremism in their work, the third most common attitude, belief or ideology cited after sectarianism and racism. Some public sector practitioners were able to give clear examples of right-wing extremist behaviour and symbols they had experienced. Generally these examples related to Nazism or neo-Nazism, such as displaying swastikas, reading books, or expressing admiration for Adolf Hitler.
When asked about experiences of extremism, those who had experience of right-wing extremist views often mentioned other potentially offensive views, from sectarian to misogynistic to anti-LGBTQ views, suggesting that those who hold right-wing extremist views often hold other extreme views. Some mentioned young people as particularly vulnerable to right-wing extremist ideologies, and attributed the growth of these, along with other potentially offensive views, to engagement with extremist content on the internet.
“Working with young people who identify with incel ideologies and have been influenced by others, mostly online. Use of racist language, Nazi iconography and the demonstration of intolerance of LGBTQ individuals.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent non-managerial role, Primary / Secondary education, Survey)
“A patient of mine lived with a grandson, who was referred to Prevent. He expressed extreme right-wing, Nazi and racist viewpoints, has swastika flags in his bedroom. He never expressed these opinions in front of me, only his grandmother told me about them.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent non-managerial role, Health and social care, Survey)
Islamist extremism
Throughout qualitative research sessions discussing extremism, public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles often discussed examples of Islamist extremism, but had rarely experienced this directly. Islamist extremism was seen definitively to be a form of extremism as respondents associated violent events such as Islamist terror attacks with the concept of Islamist extremism.
A few public sector practitioners also made a link between extremism and immigration or ethnic minority populations. This small group of practitioners suggested in qualitative discussions that places with larger ethnic minority populations are more likely to have a significant extremist problem than those with smaller ethnic minority populations (such as Scotland compared with England or rural areas compared with urban areas).
While some practitioners articulated these views in more nuanced ways, referencing how religious or ethnic minority groups may be marginalised within society and therefore more vulnerable to radicalisation, a small number of public sector practitioners made statements that were explicitly prejudiced against Muslims.
However, public sector practitioners did not feel that Islamist extremism was particularly prevalent in Scotland, as the main examples of Islamist extremism that they could recall had taken place in England or other parts of the world. Although 81% of public sector practitioners said they saw Islamist extremism as a problem in Scotland, just under half (48%) saw it as a minor problem, compared with 33% seeing it as a big or moderate problem. In response to the open question around experiences of extremism in the survey, only a handful of public sector practitioners reported experiences with Islamist extremism in their work.
Public sector practitioners who saw Prevent as part of their roles were more likely to see Islamist extremism as a minor problem in Scotland (50%) and less likely to see it as a big problem (4%) than those who had not heard of Prevent or did not see it as part of their role (38% saw it as a minor problem, 10% as a big problem). The latter were more likely to be uncertain about the extent of the problem, with 19% saying they ‘don’t know’ compared with 9% of those seeing Prevent as part of their roles.
This suggests that public sector practitioners who were more familiar with Prevent as part of their roles were more likely to feel certain about the extent of the problem of Islamist extremism, and to see it as less of a problem than public sector practitioners less familiar with Prevent as part of their roles.
Extreme nationalist or separatist groups
‘Extreme nationalist or separatist groups’, which was terminology presented to participants without any prior definition, were seen to be almost as problematic as right-wing extremism, with 85% seeing the former and 84% the latter as a problem in Scotland and 48% seeing the former as a big or moderate problem, compared with 53% for the latter. Participants tended to describe anti-English sentiment, usually related to the Scottish independence debate, when referring to such groups. However, as with racism and sectarianism, in contrast to right-wing extremism, there was a sense that while these groups exist and the views may be extreme, they are unlikely to lead to more concerning forms of extremism such as violence and/or acts of terrorism.
“I had never thought of nationalist as being extreme. You can have extreme views but not act out on them.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Health and social care, Mini focus group)
Other groups
The greatest level of uncertainty was around the prevalence of ‘incels’ and leftist / Marxist groups, with a third (32%) and a fifth (22%) of public sector practitioners saying they did not know the extent of the problem in Scotland for these two groups respectively. In qualitative discussions, leftist / Marxist groups were generally understood as a category, but broadly not seen to be a big source of extremism in Scotland. In the survey, nearly one fifth (18%) of public sector practitioners saw leftist / Marxist groups as ‘no problem at all’, the highest proportion across the groups listed. On the other hand, there was generally low awareness of what ‘incels’ are, with public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles more likely to be aware of them, and consider them a problem than those not in Prevent-related roles.
Several public sector practitioners who were responsible for dealing with Prevent referrals mentioned ‘incels’ as an increasingly prevalent group in the qualitative research, often before being prompted with the list of possible extremist groups. In contrast, in discussions with public sector practitioners without Prevent-related roles, ‘incels’ did not come up until prompted, and few were aware of this group at that point. Although more public sector practitioners in Prevent-related roles were aware of ‘incels’ and some could point to examples of ‘incel’ ideology or related terror acts, most did not bring this group up, or were not aware of them when prompted.
“I read about this and in America it seems to be quite strong, but a lot of the bad things about America may come here later, so we may get it in a few years’ time.”
(Practitioner without a Prevent-related role, Primary / Secondary education, Mini focus group)
“The rise of that I’ve been more aware of certainly. For example, the Chad or Stacy[12] language used by incel community.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)
This was reflected in the survey, with public sector practitioners in Prevent managerial roles (i.e., those with a responsibility to manage or coordinate a response to Prevent concerns) more likely to see ‘incels’ as a problem in Scotland than those in Prevent non-managerial roles (71% compared with 57%). The results were similar for those with experience of Prevent in their roles compared with those without (72% compared with 57% seeing it as a problem). Additionally, public sector practitioners in Prevent managerial roles (24%) and those with experience of Prevent (24%) were less likely to say ‘don’t know’ than those in Prevent non-managerial roles (36%) or those without experience (35%) about the prevalence of ‘incels’.
Other suggested types of extremism in Scotland mentioned by public sector practitioners beyond the list presented to them included groups relating to LGBTQ rights (mostly citing homophobia or transphobia, but a few citing ‘pro-LGBT drives’ or ‘transgender rights groups’) and ‘mixed or unclear’ (as described by participants) attitudes, beliefs or ideologies.
Although mixed or unclear beliefs or ideologies were only mentioned by a few police public sector practitioners with Prevent-related roles, it was notable as they were public sector practitioners who work closely with Prevent referrals, and saw this as a prominent and growing concern. Of the Prevent referrals in Scotland over the period of April 2021 to March 2022, the most common type of concern related to a mixed, unstable or unclear ideology (54%), defined as ‘instances where the ideology presented involves a combination of elements from multiple ideologies (mixed), shifts between different ideologies (unstable), or where the individual does not present a coherent ideology yet may still pose a terrorism risk (unclear)’, followed by right-wing extremism (31%) (Police Scotland, 2023b). There appears to be a lack of awareness amongst public sector practitioners about this type of concern.
“The majority of referrals I see are now unclear or mixed ideologies and right-wing... People are just bringing together different ideologies and picking the bits that suit them.”
(Practitioner with a Prevent-related role, Police Scotland, In-depth interview)
4.5. Conclusions
Extremism was seen to be a problem in Scotland but was perceived to be a much smaller problem for Scotland than the rest of the UK and the rest of the world. There was also a clear perception that extremism is an increasing problem in Scotland. However, some in Prevent-related roles questioned whether this was due to increasing awareness and knowledge of Prevent, rather than a genuine rise in the prevalence of extremism.
Amongst public sector practitioners there was a relatively high level of uncertainty about the prevalence of extremism in their own local areas and in Scotland more widely compared with further afield. This was particularly the case for those who were less familiar with the Prevent aspect of their roles, suggesting that their perceptions were less likely to be drawn from their own experience. Instead, these practitioners often referred to large-scale terrorist events outside of their own experience.
Racists or hate groups and sectarian groups were seen as the most prevalent types of problematic beliefs within Scotland that were tested in the survey. However, they were not always classed as extremist, likely due to perceptions that these attitudes and beliefs are both commonplace and that they do not frequently lead to violence and/or acts of terrorism. Conversely, Islamist extremism was seen as very uncommon in Scotland, and was usually associated with violence and/or acts of terrorism. A small number of public sector practitioners expressed explicitly prejudiced ideas when discussing Islamist extremism.
There were differences in perceptions about the prevalence of extremist ideologies in Scotland between public sector practitioners who were more familiar and those who were less familiar with Prevent as part of their roles. Those who were more familiar were more likely to cite right-wing extremism as a big problem in Scotland than those who were less familiar. Similarly, only a handful of public sector practitioners with Prevent-related roles who worked closely with Prevent referrals mentioned mixed, unstable and unclear concerns as being prevalent in Scotland.
Conversely, public sector practitioners were more likely to see Islamist extremism as a big problem in Scotland if they had not heard of Prevent or did not see it as part of their role.
Contact
Email: SVT@gov.scot
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback