How a far-right activist’s sentence reflects problematic notions of ‘educability’

A new analysis of a court case in which a far-right nationalist was sentenced to read classic novels suggests it reflects a deeper societal presumption that only White people are fully capable of reform through learning.

The study reassesses the case of Ben John, a former student who, in 2021, was found guilty of possessing extremist literature to plot a terrorist attack in England, based on his racist, anti-immigrant, and homophobic views. John’s case became notorious because, despite potentially facing a 15-year prison sentence, he received a suspended sentence and was ordered to read classic English literature: including Charles Dickens, Jane Austen and Anthony Trollope.

The decision drew considerable criticism and was eventually challenged by the government and overturned; John was subsequently jailed.

Although the sentence was unusual, the new study, by researchers from the University of Cambridge and Goldsmith’s University, London, argues that it should not be considered anomalous.

The authors suggest it reflects a wider societal issue with “White educability” – the idea that White people are uniquely capable of being improved through education, and that conversely, non-White individuals, particularly Muslims, are not.

Tyler Denmead, an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, and the study’s lead author, said: “We have wanted to review the Ben John story for some time, because it is as much about education as it is about justice – in particular the way it framed John as a learner.”

“Our analysis suggests that the judgement reflects a deeper assumption that a White person who offends – and in this case was convicted under counter-terrorism legislation – can find their way back to societal acceptance through education. For a Muslim offender, the response would have almost certainly have been immediate imprisonment and exclusion.”

The study, published in the journal, Discourse, argues that John’s case reflects a particular type of circulating ‘racial knowledge’: a tacit, societal belief that links terrorism with Islam more than with White people.

The authors write that the post-9/11 ‘War on Terror’ has led to a broad perception that Muslims represent an ever-present outsider threat to British society. Far-right nationalist groups – whose propaganda fuelled John’s ideology – are not seen as a threat in the same way.

While far-right nationalists are targeted in counter-terrorism initiatives, the study critiques the double standards of programmes like the Prevent Duty, which requires people working in education to identify and report individuals considered at risk of radicalisation.

Critics argue that Prevent has created a hostile environment for Muslim and non-White students in universities and schools. In 2023, the police were found to be overwhelmingly more likely to strip-search non-White children, often on school grounds. This is an example, the authors suggest, of how ‘threats’ to public security are often seen in racial terms.

In such a context, the study argues that non-White students face far more aggressive and intrusive scrutiny than their White peers. It also suggests that this reflects residual beliefs from Britain’s colonial past, when education was often positioned as a means of civilising non-White societies and demanded conformity with White culture and values.

Ben John’s case reflects this, the researchers argue, because even though he was sentenced for a terrorism offence, he was not ‘constructed’ as a terrorist. Instead, he was treated as a learner who was capable of putting his life back on course through exposure to a curriculum of White, British authors – the assumption apparently being that this would remedy his hostility to non-White people.

During the trial, the argument was also made that he was “by no means a lost cause and is capable of living a normal, pro-social life” – a perspective that the authors argue would almost certainly not have been applied to a Muslim on trial for similar offences.

Duaa Karim, a doctoral researcher at the University of Cambridge and co-author, said: “Education is partly about recognising an individual’s capacity to learn and contribute to society. For the last 20 years, a significant part of public and policy discourse has constructed Muslims as a threat lacking that capacity.”

“These ideas surface in different ways. Ben John’s case was not just a one-off; it reflects this idea that White people are educable and Muslims are not. In a society that is prepared to recognise that broader problem, the issue with John’s sentence might not have arisen.”

The study therefore concludes that the initial leniency shown towards John highlights the problem of an unjust, ‘racial knowledge’ which characterises many different facets of British society. Denmead argues, for example, that such biases empowered far-right activists to start the Islamophobic riots that erupted in Britain during the summer of 2024.

“What we want to raise in this study is that these are not just isolated incidents,” Denmead added. “They reflect increasingly ingrained assumptions which fuel far-right extremism. The ideas of educability which permeate the John trial illustrate that. They are not just a challenge not for the justice system, but for education as well.”

The study is published in Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education.