When governments adopt broad, poorly specified definitions (e.g., 'anti‑Muslim hostility') that conflate critique of a religion with hostility toward its adherents, public institutions will sanitize or avoid legitimate debate to reduce legal and reputational risk. The result is a systemic chilling effect across universities, media, regulators and local government where scrutiny of religious ideas becomes risky.
— If institutionalized, this form of regulatory definition‑creep will reshape what topics are discussable in public life and shift power toward groups that can leverage protections to deter criticism.
Matt Goodwin
2026.01.02
100% relevant
Matt Goodwin cites Labour’s proposal to impose an 'anti‑Muslim hostility' definition on public bodies and regulators—language that explicitly foregrounds 'racialisation' and 'stereotyping' and that he argues will be interpreted to suppress critique of Islam.
← Back to All Ideas