Extremist political parties

[amadeus]

You know who liked banning political parties? Hitler!

 

[The Last Conformist]

Quirke's Exception!

 

[Goober]

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.

 

[luiz]

No they shouldn't be banned.

Representative democracy exists to represent the views of all society. Even idiotic bastards like the ones who vote for a Nazi-like party have the right to have their views represented. If we ban their party, we're not that much better then them.

They can shout their racial/social hatred all they want, it's their right. But as soon as the party commits any act of violence, then ban it and put the leaders in jail.

 

[Caranamrta]

I'd ban all parties.

(talk about political extremities )

 

[Voynich]

It is much better not to ban parties. Banning a party only increases its aura which it then uses to attract support. If a demented party is allowed to operate in the open it is forced into the open and loses support/moderates. Another problem with banning parties is that if a government possesses the ability to do so it will quickly make use of it to hinder any position that it encounters from other parties. Also banned parties tend to become violent.

 

[Halcyon]

Banning such nonsenses doesn't stop anyone. Telling people that they're not allowed to hold certain idologies doesn't stop them doing so. On top of that, there's the whole free democracy thing, which is reason enough on its own. So, I say, let them march on the streets doing their silly salute, and we may or may not turn a blind eye when someone punches them in the throat.

 

[insurgent]

What luiz said.

Here's a thought: some people have called me an extremist. Should it be forbidden for me to organise with fellow libertarians here in Denmark? Americans may not consider this a fundamentally extremist movement, but certainly my views diverge radically from those of the majority here...

 

[anarres]

Good to see people here can at least vote right on one poll.

goober - "Democracy" is a very basic concept and one that embodies the right of the individual to take part in the decision making process of their nation. By banning a party with a political viewpoint you are undermining Democracy itself, and such a ban can only do what you are trying to stop ("threaten the very ideals of democracy").

 

[King Alexander]

No, extremist political parties should not be banned, while in Democracy. Democracy has legal ways of protecting itself from extremist parties. If the people vote to get out of Democracy, that's another story.

 

[Sarevok]

The only party that should be universally banned are Fascist and Nazi parties.

 

[Loaf Warden]

I'd like to ban all political parties. Let candidates run by telling us what they believe in and intend to do, and let each citizen vote for the candidate that believes in what they believe in and intends to do what they want done.

 

[amadeus]

The only party that should be universally banned are Fascist and Nazi parties.

What about Stalinist and Maoist parties? Are they any better, or any more deserving of the liberties we have than the Nazis and fascists?

I'd like to ban all political parties. Let candidates run by telling us what they believe in and intend to do, and let each citizen vote for the candidate that believes in what they believe in and intends to do what they want done.

That's almost happened in Uganda. Activity of parties is very heavily restricted there.

 

[King Alexander]

The only party that should be universally banned are Fascist and Nazi parties.

All extremist parties have names that are totally irrelevant to their true principles and beliefs, how it'd be safe to tell(if you don't know) whether a political party is extremist or not?
Who and how should decide the previous?
Would be right to ban these parties while in Democracy? If we do so, they'll probably gain more power and appeal to the people, because their leaders (will) claim: "what kind of a Democracy is this? We're not allowed to have a party? They're oppressing us!"

"Democracy" itself is a very misused word: many countries claim that they have Democracy, but in reality, it's exactly the opposite

EDIT: The Communist party in western countries is no threat at all: even with mayors who got elected, practically they followed more conservative policies than the ideas they had in the beginning of their political careers. That's no surprise at all: these people never lived(and most of them would never want to live) in former eastern countries or the former USSR, so, I don't think they could pose a threat.

EDIT 2: In fact, I believe that some of the former communist members who "moved| themselves to socialism(an indirect way to say "we were wrong!", but they'd never admit it in publicly), they have(and they could) made a good social policy, caring more about the citizens from the conservative mayors before them. That's all.

Look, there are some ideas(even from Communism), that are good: my belief is that a good political system should adopt the best from each goverment.
I don't care and I don't want to belong to a party; I try to see what's best from each of them, while having always in mind that under no circumstances our Democracy should be in danger from those political ideas.

 

[Ramius75]

No party should be banned, they can advertised whatever they want during campaign period but will be advice to stay low during normal years.

Sadly many incumbant parties like to control the campaign and election to their advantage especially in westminister system countries.

Staying to topic, No party should be banned. It the people choice and this is the true spirit of democracy.

Ramius

 

[Joey_Ramone]

In Germany, the Nazi Party (The Nationalist Sozialist Deutsch Arbeiter Partei, or the National Socialist German Worker's Party) is banned, and has been for many years. So is the swastika and what has become to be known the "Hitler Salute".But it doesn't actually stop extremist parties. There are very well neo-Nazis who get around the salute by saluting only with the uindex and middle finger.
There is no way to stop extremist parties, so what is your view? Do you support the banning of them, or is it morally and democratically wrong?

Banning them is stupid, for a number of different reasons. I'm glad that in the US we have freedom of speech. I've heard that in Europe the door is open to prosecute Priests and Ministers for quoting anti-homosexual biblical passages.

 

[Sims2789]

If we ban extremist parties, then who will decide if a parties are extremist and which ones aren't? Plus, it's un-democratic to put a muzzle on what you don't like.

 

[Adversary]

If you ban any political party regardless of ideology you are also effectively putting a muzzle on a section of the population that supports them or has similair views.How else do they make themselves heard..Bombs.?

 

[Caranamrta]

The freedom of speech can stay intact, even if all the parties are banned.

 

[Iggy]

The only party that should be universally banned are Fascist and Nazi parties.

No, that would simply add to their mystique and bolster an underground movement which would use none democratic methods to make their presence felt.
Extremists must be free to air their views (but not incite hatred), talk to others and eventually grow up or be carted off by the men in white coats.