Red Wales
28-10-2004, 01:07
The National Union of Students in the UK have a "No-Platform Policy" which is designed as an "anti-fascist/racist" policy to stop giving parties like the BNP a public forum and that they will refuse to share a forum with them if they are given a platform. If you want to read it in more detail
http://www.nusonline.co.uk/campaigns/antiracismantifascism/11534.aspx
I Personally think that this is a bad thing to do, especially in a liberal democracy such as Britain.
Everyone is entitled to express their point of view, no matter how 'bad' or how much someone disagrees with it and the NUS banning such groups from being given a public forum with their events and not sharing public forums with them just shows that the NUS is a petty fascists organisation in it self who oppress all those who dare to oppose them.
Also why single out the BNP because of it's "extreme views" what about the SWP and their "extreme views"? both parties are living in dream worlds.
Problems also emerge in that it actually gives the BNP a stronger leg to stand on, they can claim discrimination and they that are being oppressed and they are right to say that they are being oppressed. This will make their supporters stronger and they may actually result in them moving to more violence methods because they are not allowed to express their view point.
I would much rather them being kept in a non-violent debate where sensible people can make up their own minds on what political ideology they can follow.
People are intelligent enough to make up their own minds on such issues and don't need to be "protected" from "Dangerous ideology" people will usually vote, not always of course, but usually vote for what they believe is best for them and if the majority think the BNP is the best party to lead them then so be it, but of course the BNP are never going to have the number of voters it needs to get into power.
The refusing to share platforms also leads to the possibility that they have unopposed platforms where no-one is there to give across an alternative point of view and debate the issues at hand which undermines the whole idea of not giving them credibility, because unopposed they will gain it.
The NUS therefore has got it's entire policy on the false believe that it will undermine the credibility of such parties, because it anything it gives them more of it.
http://www.nusonline.co.uk/campaigns/antiracismantifascism/11534.aspx
I Personally think that this is a bad thing to do, especially in a liberal democracy such as Britain.
Everyone is entitled to express their point of view, no matter how 'bad' or how much someone disagrees with it and the NUS banning such groups from being given a public forum with their events and not sharing public forums with them just shows that the NUS is a petty fascists organisation in it self who oppress all those who dare to oppose them.
Also why single out the BNP because of it's "extreme views" what about the SWP and their "extreme views"? both parties are living in dream worlds.
Problems also emerge in that it actually gives the BNP a stronger leg to stand on, they can claim discrimination and they that are being oppressed and they are right to say that they are being oppressed. This will make their supporters stronger and they may actually result in them moving to more violence methods because they are not allowed to express their view point.
I would much rather them being kept in a non-violent debate where sensible people can make up their own minds on what political ideology they can follow.
People are intelligent enough to make up their own minds on such issues and don't need to be "protected" from "Dangerous ideology" people will usually vote, not always of course, but usually vote for what they believe is best for them and if the majority think the BNP is the best party to lead them then so be it, but of course the BNP are never going to have the number of voters it needs to get into power.
The refusing to share platforms also leads to the possibility that they have unopposed platforms where no-one is there to give across an alternative point of view and debate the issues at hand which undermines the whole idea of not giving them credibility, because unopposed they will gain it.
The NUS therefore has got it's entire policy on the false believe that it will undermine the credibility of such parties, because it anything it gives them more of it.