You assume that government action is needed to make people leave. You misunderstand. We need to create an environment which makes it hard for those who want to behave like or preach the ideology of homicidal fascism to do so.
But what, specifically, would you have us do? It is already illegal to preach or undertake homicide, so that's a matter for an active DPP. It is legal to support fascism, or caliphates. If you would like more people to speak out against them, you can urge this, and some will and some won't, just like now. Are you suggesting more than actively speaking out, as many already do, with more or less media coverage? As a general rule, the more reasonable a speech, the less coverage it gets (how much coverage has the outraged MCB statement on the bombings had?).
You won't, I think, suspect that I have secret sympathies for fascism (or caliphates). But I argued against the attempt to stop BNP spokesmen from holding meetings, so long as their speeches stayed within the law: I think we lose more by suppressing opinion than we gain. We should define what is legal carefully, then allow any legal opinion to be held and expressed.
Nick: I spelt out specific actions in a post back in January. I can dig that out. It will take me a bit of time.
It's not just law. It's about social pressure. If people started behaving like Nazis or expressing support for Nazism, they would be ostracised. They would be considered beyond the pale. Social ostracism can be very effective. But when a cleric expresses similar views, a Labour Mayor extends the hand of friendship to him. I want us to make that unacceptable - not by banning it - but by making it inconceivable that decent people would do such a thing. Too many people in your party don't think it inconceivable to do such a thing; they did not think it inconceivable to speak in front of a segregated audience, for instance.
By focusing only on the law you are missing the most important and effective ways in which a society polices itself.
(And of course I don't think you a secret supporter of fascism or caliphates. But I do think you can be naive about the ruthlessness of those who do and how they will interpret what you think of as reasonableness as weakness and exploit it to create a space for the expression of vile ideas and the carrying out of vile actions.)
@RobertSimpson76: BBC this morning claiming growth of right-wing in Britain worse than terrorism-Insane+dangerous left-wing UK media https://t.co/9EkvJnECvL
There have been a couple of "left wing" commentators that have said they "fear" the rise of right wing politicians as a result of this.
they don't fear the terrorists, the people trying to kill us, they fear polemic...
You assume that government action is needed to make people leave. You misunderstand. We need to create an environment which makes it hard for those who want to behave like or preach the ideology of homicidal fascism to do so.
You won't, I think, suspect that I have secret sympathies for fascism (or caliphates). But I argued against the attempt to stop BNP spokesmen from holding meetings, so long as their speeches stayed within the law: I think we lose more by suppressing opinion than we gain. We should define what is legal carefully, then allow any legal opinion to be held and expressed.
Shouldn't we be in fact extending freedom of opinion by repealing some of the religious hate legislation so that Islam (in this instance but not exclusively) can be ridiculed or satirized, perhaps in the manner of the late Dave Allen with the Catholic church, without fear of prosecution (still less persecution by the nutters).
I agree with this absolutely. Remember Nick Griffin's notorious appearance on Question Time? Lots of people argued he shouldn't be given such a platform. I think we can now see that the huge decline of recent years in support for his party can be dated quite precisely to the aftermath of that appearance.
Argue against views you find repulsive. Don't seek to censor them, and trust the British people to make their own minds up.
You assume that government action is needed to make people leave. You misunderstand. We need to create an environment which makes it hard for those who want to behave like or preach the ideology of homicidal fascism to do so.
You won't, I think, suspect that I have secret sympathies for fascism (or caliphates). But I argued against the attempt to stop BNP spokesmen from holding meetings, so long as their speeches stayed within the law: I think we lose more by suppressing opinion than we gain. We should define what is legal carefully, then allow any legal opinion to be held and expressed.
Shouldn't we be in fact extending freedom of opinion by repealing some of the religious hate legislation so that Islam (in this instance but not exclusively) can be ridiculed or satirized, perhaps in the manner of the late Dave Allen with the Catholic church, without fear of prosecution (still less persecution by the nutters).
I agree with this absolutely. Remember Nick Griffin's notorious appearance on Question Time? Lost of people argued he shouldn't be given such a platform. I think we can now see that the huge decline of recent years in support for his party can be dated quite precisely to the aftermath of that appearance.
Argue against views you find repulsive. Don't seek to censor them, and trust the British people to make their own minds up.
The best take down of Griffin wasn't QT (although that was the widest viewed). It was Iain Dale, who actually asked him policy questions and he was totally stumped that somebody didn't try and shout him down with ok you racist, your a racist aren't you...
As soon as they got into his policy positions it became totally clear he had no idea, no answers, nothing.
Well having watched Corbyn on Sky, I can't imagine him as PM having to make any difficult decisions. He makes Gordon Brown look decisive, and this is the man who when asked a simple quesiton about his favourite food said...
I like chinese food, indian food, I likes English food um, British food. I like French foo..., uh ..
@RobertSimpson76: BBC this morning claiming growth of right-wing in Britain worse than terrorism-Insane+dangerous left-wing UK media https://t.co/9EkvJnECvL
There have been a couple of "left wing" commentators that have said they "fear" the rise of right wing politicians as a result of this.
they don't fear the terrorists, the people trying to kill us, they fear polemic...
Jesus, Scott. You should check who you link to. His avatar is some sort of "white pride" logo, and his bio...
So now we know. The material is a plastic which can retain heat. I can now relax having received the correct answer. But beware Orion's belt Plato.
No it is not. It's effectively some very thin insulation. The reflective surface is very bad a radiating your body heat outwards, but very good at reflecting it back inwards. The plastic means its flexible and tough enough to be a [temporary] garment. 100% Bacofoil would be as good, but easy to tear.
You assume that government action is needed to make people leave. You misunderstand. We need to create an environment which makes it hard for those who want to behave like or preach the ideology of homicidal fascism to do so.
You won't, I think, suspect that I have secret sympathies for fascism (or caliphates). But I argued against the attempt to stop BNP spokesmen from holding meetings, so long as their speeches stayed within the law: I think we lose more by suppressing opinion than we gain. We should define what is legal carefully, then allow any legal opinion to be held and expressed.
Shouldn't we be in fact extending freedom of opinion by repealing some of the religious hate legislation so that Islam (in this instance but not exclusively) can be ridiculed or satirized, perhaps in the manner of the late Dave Allen with the Catholic church, without fear of prosecution (still less persecution by the nutters).
We frequently say that a politician can recover from almost anything, except ridicule and becoming a joke.
Giving ourselves the freedom to take the piss out of the medieval lifestyle that stimulates the wet dreams of some clerics would be a powerful weapon.
The act of offending makes the offended have to justify the beliefs that they hold. If they fail to do so those beliefs will adapt (for better or worse). While I accept there are some subjects that deserve protection, religion and politics do not.
Funny how PB Tories think the current ISIS problem is all Jezzas fault.
The primary reason for ISIS existing IMO is the slaughter of Muslims in wars such as Iraq.
Remind me which side were you on in those decisions.
I was on the same as Jezza.
I think a certain Ken Clarke said at the time you will create thousands of OBL's with the pursuit of this war. He was right.
No one thinks ISIS is Corbyn's fault. Like almost every other topic he is not relevant to their success or failure.
All it demonstrates is the poor judgments he has made in the past; the sort of people he wanted to associate with and support; his basic stupidity in giving these sort of people credence on the basis that if they were anti-American or anti-British they were probably right about other things as well; the futility of his basically pacifist stand when faced with such murderous villains and the problems his party has caused with multiculturalism, uncontrolled immigration from alien cultures and its tolerance of behaviour and attitudes incompatible with our core values for electoral advantage.
That's all.
I disagree David, Scott and his ilk seem to lay the ills of the world at Corbyn's feet , very tedious indeed.
It gives him a relevance he simply doesn't deserve.
The ills of the labour party lie at Corbyn's feet.
We are getting to the point now where even ordinary Labour Party Members will have to re-consider voting for a Corbyn led party especially after this last week with Looney Left 1980s comeback performance. For many of us who want a credible democratic opposition to the Conservative party this is our lowest point.
Comments
Just like the Conservative Party.
I'd prefer to be a magnetar ...
It's not just law. It's about social pressure. If people started behaving like Nazis or expressing support for Nazism, they would be ostracised. They would be considered beyond the pale. Social ostracism can be very effective. But when a cleric expresses similar views, a Labour Mayor extends the hand of friendship to him. I want us to make that unacceptable - not by banning it - but by making it inconceivable that decent people would do such a thing. Too many people in your party don't think it inconceivable to do such a thing; they did not think it inconceivable to speak in front of a segregated audience, for instance.
By focusing only on the law you are missing the most important and effective ways in which a society polices itself.
(And of course I don't think you a secret supporter of fascism or caliphates. But I do think you can be naive about the ruthlessness of those who do and how they will interpret what you think of as reasonableness as weakness and exploit it to create a space for the expression of vile ideas and the carrying out of vile actions.)
I might be wrong, but I suspect the solution they thought it might bring about is "some dead lunatics"
I think they might be right
There have been a couple of "left wing" commentators that have said they "fear" the rise of right wing politicians as a result of this.
they don't fear the terrorists, the people trying to kill us, they fear polemic...
I agree with this absolutely. Remember Nick Griffin's notorious appearance on Question Time? Lots of people argued he shouldn't be given such a platform. I think we can now see that the huge decline of recent years in support for his party can be dated quite precisely to the aftermath of that appearance.
Argue against views you find repulsive. Don't seek to censor them, and trust the British people to make their own minds up.
As soon as they got into his policy positions it became totally clear he had no idea, no answers, nothing.
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=16264&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I like chinese food, indian food, I likes English food um, British food. I like French foo..., uh ..
Giving ourselves the freedom to take the piss out of the medieval lifestyle that stimulates the wet dreams of some clerics would be a powerful weapon.
The act of offending makes the offended have to justify the beliefs that they hold. If they fail to do so those beliefs will adapt (for better or worse). While I accept there are some subjects that deserve protection, religion and politics do not.