While I was on blogging hiatus, the members of Blogpower – following months of discusssion – voted to (temporarily) expel BNP blogs from the group.
To be honest, I have mixed feelings about this.
The case for expulsion is hard to argue against: Blogpower was set-up to promote smaller blogs, and by darkening the image of the group in many eyes the presence of the BNP was hurting its central aim. Getting rid of the BNP blogs encourages more people to join – which is an extremely good thing.
However, I also believe that all voices should be heard – no matter who idiotic or repulsive we find them. Bringing the ideas of the BNP to a wider audience is probably the best way to expose just how outdated and inadequate they are. It’s through discussion that ideas should be defeated, not censorship.
Not that the Blogpower decision was censorship – the BNP blogs still publish. But I can’t help feeling that for some the decision was based on the idea that certain viewpoints are unacceptable and need to be stamped out.
The explicitly tribalist ideas of the BNP should be given an airing, as – to varying degrees – they’re shared by a number of people. Holding them up to the light, showing that individual character is more important than superficialities such as skin colour, is the best way to deal with them. As long as people want to pretend they don’t exist, that can’t be done.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Dealing with the BNP
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
"I loathe what you say, but will fight to the death for your right to say it". Trite, maybe, whether or not Voltaire actually said it, but nonetheless true. As an elderly lifelong civil libertarian I've no time whatsoever for the current PC fashion of discounting the merit of opinions according to who is expressing them. Even the most virtuous and sensible people sometimes talk rubbish, and the most repulsive have a valid point now and then. I am totally against banning anyone from anywhere [apart from direct incitement to violence]. That is why I refuse to post any more on the Guardian's absurdly named 'Comment is Free' - a site where comment is anything but free.
I think it's a shame that more people don't think the way you do on these matters - I agree Matt, the best, and only way to deal with the likes of the BNP is to challenge them in free and open debate.
It appears that not many people actually understand the importance of having all the issues out in the open - it stands to reason that you cannot have a full and frank discussion about race or racism without the views of people like the BNP being heard.
As you well know mate, I am no friend of the scum that support the BNP - but I feel just as strongly about this matter as you and our libertarian friend anticant. Indeed, back in the early 90's I went out to meet a 'anti-racist' demo organised by the anti-Nazi League to oppose it. The ANL wanted the police to shut down a BNP bookshop all because they said it caused grave offense to local residents - but the main reason why I opposed that demo is because the BNP have a right to run a political bookshop whether we like it or not.
Worse still, if the police had closed the BNP shop, it would only be a matter of time before the police shut down the RCP's bookshop in Camden, or the Worker's Power bookshop in Brixton, or even the SWP's bookshop in Kings Cross, all because the police would now have the power to close down any bookshop they found offensive.
The main issue should how you put it Matt 'all voices should be heard – no matter how idiotic or repulsive we find them' - because that is the true democratic way.
There was a very specific non-political reason - that these two were taking the piss. I agreed there was clear evidence one was but not the other. I was over-ruled on the second.
This caused one esteemed member to leave but possibly saved about twelve others from leaving, as they were contemplating. It was not an easy decision either way and certainly not undertaken lightly.
The best way to deal with fools is to give them their hour upon the stage. I think it was Shakespeare who didn't say that.
That said, Blogpower is a privately run group, and so I suppose it reserves the right to choose its members. Anyway, kicking people out of the group doesn't stop them blogging, or other members from reading their blogs. So long as the group is open about its censoreship policies, and consistent with them (consistency being vital), I don't think it's entirely unreasonable. Regrettable perhaps, but not unreasonable. Besides, I don't think bloggers are out to change the world beyond creating a forum in which people with different politics can debate issues in a civil and courteous manner. Often, that very aim will automatically exclude the extreme tails of the distribution curve because, more often than not, the last thing those tails are capable of embracing is civility and courtesy.
"I loathe what you say, but will fight to the death for your right to say it".
Sure, but not on a private blog. It's not BP's job to air a diverse range of views.
Post a Comment