How tech could help fight the far right

Tech needn’t be a gift to demagogues or an enabler of chaos. In fact, it could be the key to raising living standards and improving public services.

Sasjkia Otto is a Senior Researcher for the Fabian Society.

The recent implementation of elements of the pioneering Online Safety Act should have been a moment for celebration. Under duties that came into force at the end of July, tech companies must protect children from “toxic algorithms” and have to explain how they will do so. These new rules build on earlier provisions introduced in March, which require companies to remove illegal content.

But this milestone has been overshadowed by the backlash, which has been egged on by far-right politicians. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage claimed that “state suppression of genuine free speech may be upon us” and vowed to roll back the legislation if his party comes to power.

This attack shows that Farage understands how closely Reform’s prospects are tied to tech policy.

The Act on its own may not have been enough to prevent last summer’s riots, when several people stirred racial hatred through online misinformation about stabbings at a girls’ dance class in Southport. But it marks an important step in an iterative process to bring stability and accountability to an increasingly chaotic online world – which, left unchecked, has fuelled far-right conspiracy theories of decline and spilled offline with alarming frequency.

Farage’s comments were echoed by tech billionaire and self-proclaimed ‘free speech absolutist’ Elon Musk, who is a vocal critic of the Act and has previously speculated about donating £80 million to Reform, which is £20 million more than Labour’s total donations in 2024.

But tech needn’t be a gift to demagogues or an enabler of chaos. In fact, it could be the key to raising living standards and improving public services. And in doing so, it would help tackle the root causes of the insecurity, inequality and alienation that fuels the far right. Recognising this, the June 2025 spending review commits billions to “mainlining” AI into the “veins of the nation”.

For tech to have this positive impact, the government must succeed in the dual challenge of delivering benefits people can feel in this parliament, while protecting them from instability and malicious actors – both in the UK and abroad. Getting one right but not the other could multiply opportunities for extremists to increase their impact on the UK.

To do both, the government must channel its efforts towards the following four things.

First, build ambitiously. The government must push ahead relentlessly with its digital transformation plans. Dithering could invite harsh judgments of the government’s performance and diminish the UK’s power to shape global tech norms in line with the UK’s values. The government has already defied expectations by rolling out the Gov.uk app in six months, after being told it was a three-year undertaking. Building on this success, it must resist calls to curb its ambitions to deliver at pace. Sometimes this will entail more investment, but the government can also be smarter about making the most of public and private resource.

Second, distribute fairly. Tech could help raise living standards, but this is not a given. Access to technology and the skills to use it productively remain unequal. And there is no guarantee that more productive businesses will grow or pass the benefits onto workers and communities. If inequality continues to rise, those most affected may be easily drawn to extremist narratives that exploit their vulnerabilities and sense of abandonment. The state must play an active role to ensure that planned AI growth zones benefit local communities, and that people across the country feel better off as the economy changes.

Third, strengthen agency. With an increasingly interconnected global tech ecosystem, democratic control over domestic policy – from investment to taxation – is at risk. And if the right safeguards aren’t in place from the outset, extreme actors could have several new tools to harm people here if they take over tech companies or national governments. The government must develop a strategy and innovate to strengthen the UK’s digital sovereignty and protect people from both state and corporate overreach.

Fourth, engage effectively. History has shown that misunderstandings and loss of trust could result in costly delays. The UK’s first attempt to digitise NHS records started a quarter of a century ago and cost £10 billion. But it ultimately failed because poor engagement resulted in poor choices and resistance from both patients and physicians. The public could be unforgiving if the government fails to deliver urgent improvements and misdirects limited public funds in the process – particularly given support for the government’s AI and innovation agenda is mixed. Recent YouGov polling found that only 42 per cent thought it was the right priority for government investment, while 39 per cent disagreed. To build support for its agenda, the government must get better at enlisting the public and workers as key partners in digital transformation and at communicating change in ways that people from different walks of life understand and support.

Some commentators have suggested that the government must choose between building the technologies of the future and protecting people. But these false trade-offs must be resisted. To stem the rise of the far right, the government must recognise the full range of opportunities and threats, and use every tool at its disposal to create a country where everybody can thrive. The stakes have never been higher.