Oxford Union Debate
Tonight Nick Griffin (leader of the British National Party) and David Irving (discredited historian) are speaking at the Oxford Union. Some politicians (such as Conservative MP Julian Lewis and Green Party principal speaker Derek Wall) have condemned the invitation. However, others (such as Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris) are standing up for the rights of Griffin and Irving to state their views.
Wall's views are interesting. I find myself agreeing with him in part - in that it was probably not constructive to have invited them in the first place.
However, I disagree with him when he says "While free speech is important, it does not mean that the Union has a right to give space to far right speakers.". The Union has every right. It is a private society. It has democratically elected a President. The President has the authority to invite speakers (and presumably had this decision not had the support of a majority of other elected office holders it would not have reached this far).
The irony is if those opposed to Griffin and Irving had not protested at all the evening would probably have passed off quietly. The audience of the Oxford Union consists of highly intelligent people. There would have been robust challenge to the views expressed - it is after all a debating society - and I cannot believe that Griffin or Irving would have influenced anyone.
A lot of problems in the world occur because we don't talk enough to each other. I know it is not likely, but is it impossible that one day Griffin or Irving might change or moderate their views? That could only happen if they do engage with intelligent people who can challenge their views. If we don't afford them that opportunity in safe situations like this then they are likely to become more entrenched.
There's a useful reference in the Green Party's Manifesto for a Sustainable Society in the section on Rights and Responsibilities. Agreed party policy is:
RR804: Speakers and Officers of The Green Party will only share platforms with groups who endorse racial, ethnic or national hatred at a public or private meeting where that offers an opportunity to confront and oppose racism.
That seems right and the meeting tonight appears to meet those criteria (substituting 'Other Invited Speakers' for 'Speakers and Officers of The Green Party').
Wall's views are interesting. I find myself agreeing with him in part - in that it was probably not constructive to have invited them in the first place.
However, I disagree with him when he says "While free speech is important, it does not mean that the Union has a right to give space to far right speakers.". The Union has every right. It is a private society. It has democratically elected a President. The President has the authority to invite speakers (and presumably had this decision not had the support of a majority of other elected office holders it would not have reached this far).
The irony is if those opposed to Griffin and Irving had not protested at all the evening would probably have passed off quietly. The audience of the Oxford Union consists of highly intelligent people. There would have been robust challenge to the views expressed - it is after all a debating society - and I cannot believe that Griffin or Irving would have influenced anyone.
A lot of problems in the world occur because we don't talk enough to each other. I know it is not likely, but is it impossible that one day Griffin or Irving might change or moderate their views? That could only happen if they do engage with intelligent people who can challenge their views. If we don't afford them that opportunity in safe situations like this then they are likely to become more entrenched.
There's a useful reference in the Green Party's Manifesto for a Sustainable Society in the section on Rights and Responsibilities. Agreed party policy is:
RR804: Speakers and Officers of The Green Party will only share platforms with groups who endorse racial, ethnic or national hatred at a public or private meeting where that offers an opportunity to confront and oppose racism.
That seems right and the meeting tonight appears to meet those criteria (substituting 'Other Invited Speakers' for 'Speakers and Officers of The Green Party').