For example, this type of distribution could represent both problems of avoiding consensus and extremism within a system, as the state cannot converge to a single value, cannot bifurcate to extreme values, and cannot move significantly from the original mean.
The much delayed counter-extremism bill, now rebranded as the counter-extremism and safeguarding bill, has yet to even properly define its core issues of "nonviolent extremism" and "British values", the joint committee on human rights said.
The government's legal advice is that the planned legislation cannot adequately define its core issues of "nonviolent extremism" and "British values"; instead it risks bringing law-abiding people under unnecessary scrutiny.
In its report, the committee reveals that it wrote to May in October 2015 when she was home secretary, asking how she intended to define "non-violent extremism" and "British values".
The long-delayed counter-extremism bill, intended to set out an agenda that is distinct but parallel to Prevent, was criticised in July by the joint committee on human rights, which found the core issues were too vague, including the phrases "non-violent extremism" and "British values".
This bill represents the rise of ideological extremism masquerading as British values.
"They've rejected the ideology of extremism and share the values of freedom and tolerance".
And no amount of proselytizing against Islamist extremism and for British values, whatever they are, will stop wannabe jihadists from seeking out the permission of the warrant.
And no amount of proselytising against Islamist extremism and for British values, whatever they are, will stop wannabe-jihadists from seeking out the permission of the warrant.
"Some say we cannot base a counter-extremism strategy on British values because it is too difficult to define them," she said.
