A while back, representatives of Index and other organisations and individuals signed a letter in response to what was seen as a censorious attempt to stop bookshops hosting signings of former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s new autobiography, A Journey.

The letter said:

When it comes to literature, drama, journalism, artistic expression and scientific publication we must be consistent in our support for free speech. How can we defend the right of the Birmingham Repertory to put on and advertise a play like Behzti, despite it being deemed offensive to some Sikhs, and then call on a bookseller not to promote one of its books – or a library not to stock it — on the grounds of offence? The answer, in a liberal society, is to not read the book if it offends you, and to not buy a copy if you don’t wish royalties to go to the author.

Since then, things have changed. On Saturday, Blair’s signing in Dublin was the subject of a rowdy protest by members of the anti-Iraq war Socialist Workers Party and Republican group Eirigi, who objected to Blair’s role in the Northern Ireland peace process.

The signing went ahead, but under a massive security operation.

Today, it’s been announced that Blair will not be signing books in London. Blair said:

I have decided not to go ahead with the signing as I don’t want the public to be inconvenienced by the inevitable hassle caused by protestors

This seems practical, but hardly ideal. Clearly the violent scenes in Dublin have made Mr Blair think again. But would things in London inevitably have turned out the same? I’m not sure. An equivalent group to Eirigi does not exist, and the groups that have previously protested against Blair have not, to be fair, turned violent.

Then again, they might have decided to follow the example of the Dublin crowds.

In which case, a literary event has been closed down due to fear of violence.

Which, to me, sounds like mob censorship.

(And no, I am not for a moment questioning the right to peaceful protest.)