To completely disagree with anti-equality viewpoints necessarily requires giving them equal hearing
So just caught up on last nights Question Time. For those of you that missed it, it's available on iplayer at the moment:
(Direct link)
The slagging match at the begining was a bit pointless. Throwing quotes at him and him denying them isn't going to convince anyone that's BNP policy unless they know he's already said them, in which case they either agree with the sentiment expressed or they don't.
The BNP have some horrendous views, but if you throw quotes at anyone that the vast majority disagree with, and they couldn't possibly justify to the people, in front of the very people they are trying to convince of their policies, then of course they are going to try and wriggle out of these things.
Unless the government make hugely monumental cock up to completely alienate the people against all the main parties, the BNP are unlikely to gain a majority in the government, so the chances of any of their most extreme policies getting implemented are minimal.
However, they do have more moderate policies that are winning over voters. These are the ones to address. When these came up later in the show, Nick opened up and not only expressed these views, but also gave insight into the underlying abhorrant reasoning behind them. That is where the true agenda of the BNP is shown off to the nation, not through a personal attack on their representative.
He has every right to hold his views and every right to express them. It is the duty of opposing politicians to expose the holes within these policies not within the person. Whatever he believes he is a human being and he deserves be treated with common courtesy regardless of whether he shows this to others in return.
No matter how extreme his views, he does have some valid points to raise. People voted for him because they believe he represents their views, so he needs to be allowed to represent them. Many of these people aren't going to believe in all the policies the BNP puts forward. Who believes in all the policies of the party they vote for? It must be a very small minority of people. If the majority of the views the BNP put forward turn out not to be what the people voted for and against what these people believe they'll question why they voted for him. However, there will be some of them that do express what the people voted for.
There are issues with people feeling that immigrants are coming into the country and threatening their way of life. There are people who find homosexual activities repulsive. Homophobia exists. These are issues that need to be raised and the BNP are quite right to raise them. Many people feel threatened by these things because they threaten the values they have been brought up to believe in and so want them brought up for discussion for that very reason.
What makes the BNP abhorrent is what they want to do about these issue, shutting them out of harms way instead of bringing them forward to help people come to terms with them. It's through debating these issues that the true nature of these policies come forward and you see exactly how anti-equality the BNP really are.
We don't fear being equal. We fear being less important than those around us and things that challenge our position in society to make us that way. To show the true nature of the BNP, you need to show how they want to make huge numbers of the people in this country into lesser citizens by promoting inequality.
I must admit I was feeling quite sorry for Griffin by the end. No matter how extreme his views are they are still as valid as anyone elses and he had to sit there and put these forwards to a room full of negative feeling towards him. It can't have been easy for him no matter how used to it he is and it was interesting to see how much he seemed to be shaking towards the end.
He and the people who voted for him, have these views for a reason. You can't just dismiss them. They need to be debated so that the issues they raise can be looked at under a more rational light. You don't gain equality by putting one persons views in higher regards than another. Equality requires all these views to be discussed on equal grounds. Only then can everyone feel that their views have been represented in the resulting solution.
There are too many of us who want to see equality for the BNP to get their way, but this equality can only be truely equal if it gives the views of all individuals including those in the BNP fair consideration.
(Direct link)
The slagging match at the begining was a bit pointless. Throwing quotes at him and him denying them isn't going to convince anyone that's BNP policy unless they know he's already said them, in which case they either agree with the sentiment expressed or they don't.
The BNP have some horrendous views, but if you throw quotes at anyone that the vast majority disagree with, and they couldn't possibly justify to the people, in front of the very people they are trying to convince of their policies, then of course they are going to try and wriggle out of these things.
Unless the government make hugely monumental cock up to completely alienate the people against all the main parties, the BNP are unlikely to gain a majority in the government, so the chances of any of their most extreme policies getting implemented are minimal.
However, they do have more moderate policies that are winning over voters. These are the ones to address. When these came up later in the show, Nick opened up and not only expressed these views, but also gave insight into the underlying abhorrant reasoning behind them. That is where the true agenda of the BNP is shown off to the nation, not through a personal attack on their representative.
He has every right to hold his views and every right to express them. It is the duty of opposing politicians to expose the holes within these policies not within the person. Whatever he believes he is a human being and he deserves be treated with common courtesy regardless of whether he shows this to others in return.
No matter how extreme his views, he does have some valid points to raise. People voted for him because they believe he represents their views, so he needs to be allowed to represent them. Many of these people aren't going to believe in all the policies the BNP puts forward. Who believes in all the policies of the party they vote for? It must be a very small minority of people. If the majority of the views the BNP put forward turn out not to be what the people voted for and against what these people believe they'll question why they voted for him. However, there will be some of them that do express what the people voted for.
There are issues with people feeling that immigrants are coming into the country and threatening their way of life. There are people who find homosexual activities repulsive. Homophobia exists. These are issues that need to be raised and the BNP are quite right to raise them. Many people feel threatened by these things because they threaten the values they have been brought up to believe in and so want them brought up for discussion for that very reason.
What makes the BNP abhorrent is what they want to do about these issue, shutting them out of harms way instead of bringing them forward to help people come to terms with them. It's through debating these issues that the true nature of these policies come forward and you see exactly how anti-equality the BNP really are.
We don't fear being equal. We fear being less important than those around us and things that challenge our position in society to make us that way. To show the true nature of the BNP, you need to show how they want to make huge numbers of the people in this country into lesser citizens by promoting inequality.
I must admit I was feeling quite sorry for Griffin by the end. No matter how extreme his views are they are still as valid as anyone elses and he had to sit there and put these forwards to a room full of negative feeling towards him. It can't have been easy for him no matter how used to it he is and it was interesting to see how much he seemed to be shaking towards the end.
He and the people who voted for him, have these views for a reason. You can't just dismiss them. They need to be debated so that the issues they raise can be looked at under a more rational light. You don't gain equality by putting one persons views in higher regards than another. Equality requires all these views to be discussed on equal grounds. Only then can everyone feel that their views have been represented in the resulting solution.
There are too many of us who want to see equality for the BNP to get their way, but this equality can only be truely equal if it gives the views of all individuals including those in the BNP fair consideration.