So the BNP, the British National Party, have had two representatives elected. Debate has exploded all over the country. Even the BBC, advoctes of the cheap and lowbrow, are screening a debate this morning entitled, "Does the BNP have the right to be heard"?
This is an issue which is close to home for me. The BNP's racist policies mean that if they were elected to government my adopted brother, who is half West Indian, might well be forced to leave Scotland, the country of his birth, possibly with his children - tearing both his and my family apart.
So surely I must think the BNP should not be heard?
Well, no. I'm sure everyone recognises the parallels between the state of our country now - the economic difficulties, the social unrest, the weak government, the emerging fascist sympathies - and Germany in the nineteen thirties (beautifully parodied by The Daily Mash here).
And yes, there are consequences to allowing extremists like fascists to be heard. In fact there are two chief consequences:
1. The risk of extreme policies being implemented.
2. Freedom of speech.
Are you prepared to lose the second to avoid the first? If so, should you not ask yourself whether there's really much difference between saying that one section of society should be silenced based on their race and saying that another should be silenced based on their politics?
No comments:
Post a Comment