Extremist political parties

[ComradeDavo]

Whilst I find it wrong to ban a political party...I can help but feel tempted to say we should ban really extreme ones such as Nazi's (like the Nazi BNP) . So....I dunno.

 

[Iggy]

Whilst I find it wrong to ban a political party...I can help but feel tempted to say we should ban really extreme ones such as Nazi's (like the Nazi BNP) . So....I dunno.

I can understand why you (or anyone) would say that as a Nazi style party usually has an agenda of hatred of others different to themselves. The BNP is the "accepable" face of nazism in the UK and some "normal" people vote for them. I would rather debate with a BNP supporter democratically or have the oppertunity to democratically show that they had little support than find out in the news papers that the newly banned underground BNP had spent their energies on racial attacks.
The BNP are probably now more concerned than ever about keeping their thugs... er.. whoops... supporters under control and stopping any racist attacks. If you take the ballot box away from them who knows what can happen.

 

[Adversary]

Calling BNP supporters Thugs is just a convenient stereotype used by certain people to dismiss their viewpoint.The days of skinheads meeting outside of pubs on a weekend is gone.Time to wake up and realise that.Dont be so complacent.
Consider this.There has been a drastic rise in the support for these parties across Europe lately and i have a theory why.I will give an example relevant to the thread starters post.For the last five years in this country anyone who raised concerns over the failings of our immigration/asylum policy was automatically labled a Nazi or a little Englander etc etc.No debate no discussion no consultation.The people who were concerned were Nazi's case closed.Five years later and Tony Blair admits that the Immigration policy has been a shambles,wholely inadequate and has been abused.
Now,where do all the people who were silenced or afraid to say anything for fear of being labelled a Rascist,Nazi blah blah blah go to make themselves heard.Yup thats right.Maybe the only place they feel that their opinion has any value.I feel that this stamping down on peoples views/concerns on any issue has enabled the right to gain a lot more support of the last few years.
Yes the BNP has it's old guard and to say they have there Nazi's is like saying Labour still has staunch trade unionists.Of course they have.
So,has the quashing of such opinions made them go away..No.And in the same way would banning a political party..No.
In a Democracy everyone should have a voice no matter how you feel about them so i voted No.

 

[cgannon64]

I can understand banning a party like the Nazi party in Germany, because they screwed up real bad last time they were in power...but no, I don't support banning parties.

 

[Adversary]

Yes but in whose eyes did they 'Screw up'.To some it was probably a noble cause that failed.
Differing ideologies and political beliefs is what makes a Democracy.You either take it or leave it.

 

[cgannon64]

Yes but in whose eyes did they 'Screw up'.To some it was probably a noble cause that failed.
Differing ideologies and political beliefs is what makes a Democracy.You either take it or leave it.

I'd say the overwhelming majority of the world beleives that genocide is a 'screw up'.

 

[Immortal]

In a Democracy everyone should have a voice no matter how you feel about them so i voted No.

Dammit 10 character

 

[sysyphus]

Calling BNP supporters Thugs is just a convenient stereotype used by certain people to dismiss their viewpoint.The days of skinheads meeting outside of pubs on a weekend is gone.Time to wake up and realise that.Dont be so complacent.

...
In a Democracy everyone should have a voice no matter how you feel about them so i voted No.

Exactly. The BNP have the right to exist, and Britons have the right to call them thugs.

In a free society, we have to put up with hearing people say things we don't like, but that's still better than the alternative.

 

[JohnRM]

I'd say any state that bans a party is more likely to boost it's membership by doing so.

No further replies needed..."hit the nail on the head"

 

[Adversary]

@ cgannon64 - The overwhelming majority of the world is not everybody.Like i said,everyone must be represented.

 

[cgannon64]

@ cgannon64 - The overwhelming majority of the world is not everybody.Like i said,everyone must be represented.

That is true...but for the sake of that overwhelming majority, its best to ban parties that have genocide as their policies.

Just like if a guy is running around the street screaming holding a gun - even if he hasn't shot anyone yet - you put him away, at least temporarily.

 

[Sims2789]

That is true...but for the sake of that overwhelming majority, its best to ban parties that have genocide as their policies.

Just like if a guy is running around the street screaming holding a gun - even if he hasn't shot anyone yet - you put him away, at least temporarily.

You don't ban the Ku Klux Klan for hating black people: you ban them when you have evidence that they have or will try to do harm to black people.

 

[Sims2789]

Ok, so I am in the minority. Democracy is all well and dandy, except for a few things, IMO, and this happens to be one of them. SOME authoritarianism is necessary, IMO. And no, I would not ban religious parties (unless they wanted to get rid of democracy, like I stated earlier). I am sure someone will bring taht up.

Would you support banning anti-Monarchist parties? If we ban political parties, where do we draw the line? What of the Republicans decide that they are the only non-extremist party and outlaw the Democrats and the Greens. In a Democracy, everyone has the right to a voice, and everyone has the right not to listen.

 

[Adversary]

Sims2789 makes a couple of good points.It really is all or nothing when it comes to Democracy.You have it or you dont.
cgannon64 - i dont think any so called extremist parties have genocide as part of their manifesto.The guy you refer to running around with the gun is breaking the law.I dont see the connection.
Remember,there are a hundred ways to hate someone.It's not all about religion or skin colour.

 

[Archer 007]

Any nation that allows the growth of hate-driven political parties is setting themselves up for trouble.

I would disagree. Nations that censor are heading for trouble.

 

[Iggy]

Calling BNP supporters Thugs is just a convenient stereotype used by certain people to dismiss their viewpoint.The days of skinheads meeting outside of pubs on a weekend is gone.Time to wake up and realise that.Dont be so complacent.
Yes the BNP has it's old guard and to say they have there Nazi's is like saying Labour still has staunch trade unionists.Of course they have.

I don’t see my awareness of the rise of the BNP as being complacent. If you care to look behind the new shinny suited propaganda of the BNP and study the criminal records of some of the party hierarchy and back room people you will find the "thug" label to be spot on. Although if one was to be a pedant I would concede that I should use the word “ex-thugs”. The skinheads have let their hair grow and have swapped their Doc Martins for brogues.
I am in agreement with you that they should have the freedom to voice their policies and should not be banned. They are becoming a far more politically aware party and there are a number of people who are using them as protest vote about the UK's immigration policies. As I said before, it is better to let them use their voices and polish up their act than turn them into an underground movement.

 

[yoshi74]

You can't ban everyone. But the NSDAP has done so much evil that it would be really a false thing not to ban them. Also the KPD (communist party) were forbidden in west germany shortly after the war, because they were quite anti-democratic. They formed again shortle as the DKP .
The difference is that they are new parties, even with the old members. But forbidding every extreme party is no solution, nor it is very democratic. So this should be left for some very serios occasions. A democracy with works and provides quite good life to its citizins has nothing to fear from the extreme parties. They only grow when the middle parties fail (or seam to fail).

 

[col]

Its the age old dilemma. Do you enshrine the right of free speech even when people say evil and seditious things?

"I hate what you say but I defend your right to say it"

Banning such parties, in my view, only drives them underground and provides a fertile recruitment environment. "See the government want to ban us because we speak the truth". Better to hear their message of hatred and fight it head on in the media and at the ballot box.

edit: Having said that I was pleased that a certain CFC member was banned from here for posting racist BNP posts.

 

[cgannon64]

You don't ban the Ku Klux Klan for hating black people: you ban them when you have evidence that they have or will try to do harm to black people.

Exactly. Don't we have evidence about the Nazi party?

 

[Sims2789]

If the current Nazi Party tries to kill Jews or we have evidence of the organization thereof plotting to, then we ban them. But as far as I know, one of the mini-Klans hasn't murdered a black person in 23 years.