Comments | anti_racism: BNP on the BBC

shaved_ape in anti_racism

BNP on the BBC

Oct 22, 2009 23:51

Tonight the BBC turned over their flagship political debate programme to a despicable one-eyed figure of hate - not 'Pudsey' the children in need bear, but Nick Griffen, leader of the fascist BNP. I was proud to be part of the thousands strong demonstration outside the BBC headquarters in West london tonight, protesting his appearance on Question ( Read more... )

Comments 11

nsingman October 24 2009, 15:41:13 UTC

"My argument is that there is nothing wrong with censoring fascists!"

Nonsense. There is plenty wrong with censoring fascists, and it's the same thing that's wrong with censoring anyone else. By advocating the censorship of anyone, you assert that some ideas are so terrible that they must not be permitted to be expressed in public. Fascists say exactly the same thing.

shaved_ape October 24 2009, 19:34:52 UTC

The people who say "Nonsense" to this have usually fundamentally misunderstod the nature of fascism.
Fascists will use the principle of freedom of speech for all - as long as it suits their needs, at the point at which they no longer needed it will be removed from everyone who opposes them. In the meantime they are free to spout whatever filth they like, not only victimising ethnic minorities, homosxuals etc but also giving encouragement to anyone who shares their views to do the same.
When nazis are allowed to exercise their rights it quickly follows that other people lose theirs. This is why I have no problem with censoring fascists and opposing them at every turn.

nsingman October 24 2009, 19:48:45 UTC

Yes, the principle of freedom of speech for all means that fascists, socialists, communists, racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes and others with whom I (and perhaps you) disagree are free to spout their filth. And every one of us who opposes them is also free to speak against their filth. That is how we should oppose them. You are absolutely right that fascists would love to limit the free speech of their political opponents. Because you are willing to limit the free speech of at least some of your political opponents, I see little difference on that very critical issue. I only see yet another opponent of free speech against whom I will always feel compelled to speak.

shaved_ape October 24 2009, 22:22:42 UTC

Its not just the free speech of their opponents that nazis wish to limit, but their liberty and their lives. Im not particularly comfortable with quoting Hitler but he once said that "The only chance our opponents had was if they smashed us completely while we were small. Once we had power it was too late." On that point he was right ( ... )

Thread 11

shaved_ape October 27 2009, 10:16:54 UTC

Once again you overlook how these organisations grow. Of oourse it wasnt Hitlers speeches or newspapers that caused the holocaust. At some point though the nazis grew from being a handful of grumpy racists sat in a room drinking beer to the political force that was able to seize the mass of state power that was able to bring the holocaust about. How do you think that happened? They used every means at their disposal, legal or otherwise, to spread their message, build their membership and create a climate for their actions to seem acceptable ( ... )