Hey guys, this is going to be a fairly short and sensible post but i would like some feedback via comments on the topic is that's alright:) So, freedom of expression. How far should this right be taken? I'm not actually sure if we have freedom of speech in this country, at least Mr Jenkins said something like that, but I'm pretty sure we have freedom of expression through human rights, and they're pretty much the same thing. Now...
1)Should a racist be able to express his views?
2)Should the BNP be banned?
3)Should Mr David Irving have been imprisoned for supposedly being a holocaust denier?
My Opinion:
Now I know those three all have links with racism, but that's probably why most people are afraid of freedom of expression in the west, since we're all allowed to criticise the government whenever we like. I would say YES a racist should be able to express his views; he would a flawed argument which would be incredibly hard to present, but they should nonetheless be able to express it. NO the BNP should not be banned. They MAY BE racist and hold other extremist views, but they should be able to criticise the government; this is a democracy after all. NO I don't think anyone should be imprisoned for denying the holocaust, even if it is illegal in Austria. I don't know whether to love or hate Mr Irving; he seems so rational at times. He has now come to accept the holocaust but still denies Hitler had any major part in the operation.
I'm sure lots of people would disagree with my views, or not even know who Mr Irving is, but please comment and let me know what you think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Agreed.
Although we may deem their opinions to be flawed or "wrong" all the same we have to accept their right to think it.
Its the actions it may lead to that should be illegal.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" Voltaire
I'm in the camp that does not know who David Irving is. Nevertheless, I believe he should be able to express his opinion, as should the BNP and racists. It's their opinion after all, and however unpleasant they may be, they still have the right to air them.
I'm struggling to understand what you mean by we don't have freedom of speech in this country - we can practically say what we like. Can you expand?
lol wt a bunch of brainwashed liberals we all seem to be :p
umm now dont quote me on this but i heard that freedom of speech wasnt actuli part of our bill of rights but im reli not sure. today we stil cant reli say watever we want i mean look at wt u get for inciting racial hatred n stuff.
i would have thought more people would be thinkin the bnp should be banned. i mean they got a seat in the london elections for god sake. if they used their opinion to get into power would that be ok? god bless liberal democracy?
I shall just reply with a classic quote, from a bloke whose name I should remember:
"I defend to the death their right to speak, but then we should go and meet them with out baseball bats."
One of my good friends is gay, and I had those Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door delivering a leaflet saying that gay people are evil and abhorrent. Fuck them, I think they're a bunch of fanatical nutters but I don't go to their doors to tell them that. They can believe what they want, but they shouldn't wave it in everyone's faces.
the quotes from woody allen. so ur saying ppl should have the right to hold views but not to openly express them? the views you hold now were most probably enforcec on you rather than through your own enlightenment so i'm gnna hav 2 disagree with u there.
I think he means they should be allowed to have those views but they shouldn't go and enforce them actively on other people. Those religious nutters who bang on people's doors are pushing their view into your face, which can be a bit disturbing. Especially if you're gay and a Jehovah's witness appears on your doorstep, or you're some freshie Indian who's just opened their door to find a BNP canvasser. I wonder what would happen in those situations?
Just quickly, since I hadn't been able to comment before...
1) Yes. You don't have to agree with what they say - you may think that their speech is immoral, but it is more immoral to shut them up entirely. Tolerate different views.
2) No. Such an act would be most unwise for several reasons; one being that it would provoke outrage amongst the right-wing members of the public, possibly transforming the verbally abusive into the physically abusive, and the physically abusive into downright murderous "vigilantes". Violence levels do not need to escalate, or broaden to the "social racists". Again, just because the BNP puts forth some wild opinions, it does NOT mean they shouldn't be able to voice them.
3) Again, no. Over here, it's not illegal to deny it, is it? If that is the case, he should not be imprisoned for it. People should surely only be imprisoned for offences that break a country's law. What other countries wish to do with him is their choice.
Post a Comment