This is a load of bollocks. I went to the point of making a good lengthy argument explaining my issue with what you are saying and you just post more emotionally weighted slogans.

“You are the sort of useful fool that results in the deaths of millions. History is your jury.”

Would you care to back this up?

And would you care to deal with this comment another poster made -

“I’d just like to point out that when Nick Griffin appeared on Questions and Answers that time in the run up to the 2010 UK general election, he was roundly defeated and humiliated. That week the British Nazi Party reported nearly a doubling in membership.”

Or does recent history not count? What you’d like to be true and what is actually true are not the same thing. The BNP has steadily gained membership even with these “Humiliations”.

Also, I like how my challenging – not of his right to an opinion, but merely his supposed right to a platform will KILL MILLIONS; whereas thinking he may actually try and recruit members when someone already pointed out he was looking to expand franchise into Ireland – when of course, he has had links with violent extremists in the past – is the result of some medication induced hallucination.

Are you even able to read the irony in your own posts? Am I not just exercising my own freedom of expression here? What makes what I have to say more dangerous than what Nick Griffin has to say? I’m very curious here. But I suspect the simple answer is that you’re full of shit and not remotely as intellectual as you pretend to be.

Privilege does not just apply to first world vs third world, and your example changes nothing.

The worst thing is when people like you take a holier than thou attitude towards these things, when at least I can put an argument behind my insults. I am angry at people because I genuinely care for people affected by racism and have been affected by discrimination and the spreading of hateful remarks myself. Whereas you are angry about a much less tangible concept – and one you mistake for “freedom of expression”, when that’s not really the issue here.

This post pure insult. It’s just a character assassination on anyone that disagrees with you. It doesn’t really explain why anything is wrong, or why the people in question are morally questionable, which I go into lengths to demonstrate. It’s full of fallacious reasoning and other bullshit.

Griffin speaking on free speech in the first place is a joke, since he wouldn’t afford it so readily if he was in power. Nobody is, again, denying his free speech. Just his supposed right to a platform. People don’t deem it appropriate, and are speaking out against it. They, under freedom of expression, have a right to do so. But of course none of us should expect to be entitled to speak at universities, which Nick Griffin seems to think he is.

Also, throwing around phrases like “Brainwashed” is extremely irritating.

In terms of who is engaging their critical faculties, those posting and liking the “Voltaire” quote are what’s really telling here. They are reciting something they have heard. It is not something they have researched for themselves, a conclusion they have come to themselves, otherwise they would know the true origin of the phrase. These are armchair liberals, just like you get armchair conservatives commenting on the Daily Mail(though I suspect some are armchair conservatives too). They are not really thinking for themselves, just reciting what they think makes them look progressive and tolerant.

I will not use a term like “Brainwashed” in this instance, more apt would be “culturally conditioned”. People are culturally conditioned to accept certain things without question. In mainland europe? A little different, as they don’t try as hard to be the USA. And freedom of expression hasn’t really collapsed there as it supposedly should have.

Your argument too – is not one that displays critical intelligence. Your example of an “African Villager” is particularly sickening as I’m not the one who apparently doesn’t care for the welfare of people who’s skin is a different colour to mine. I’m not, of course, saying people are racist, just racially apathetic. They have not experienced racism first hand, or even if they have, have deluded themselves as to the true nature of what they’re experiencing(though really, mostly, they just haven’t experienced it).

You also have no idea what the concept of privilege. If you are engaging in a serious discussion where racism is at the core – this is unforgivable. Yes, I am privileged in many ways compared to a poor Africans. I acknowledge this and attempt not to act in ways that would be offensive around people like that. I understand their position in the world may have resulted in certain sensitivities I don’t understand. However, the average white, middle class, heterosexual cisgendered male does not acknowledge the privilege they have over someone like me.

A gay man who I know personally and know has had about as much experience with these things as the “let him speak side” put together, has expressed genuine fear for his safety and the safety of those liked him. Instead of trying to understand where he’s coming from and genuinely accepting his worries, people shot down his remark.

This is privilege, and this is when it’s a problem. People aren’t “wrong” for having privilege. Privilege isn’t your fault. Flaunting your privilege or refusing to acknowledge it, is. You are probably worlds apart from this man’s life, or at least the majority of people with your argument are. You are sheltered from what he has to experience. And – privilege doesn’t cancel out other privilege. I may be disadvantaged in some ways, but I can’t use that against the idea that I may be privileged against an african person, and similarly, someone shouldn’t try to demean my life experiences because they are a racial minority.

If I was “Brainwashed”, I would not be able to make a post like this, which actually takes what you said and tackles it logically. I’m awaiting your higher functioning, enlightened response. Calling people who have thought about these things far more often and in far more depth than you have, with a greater respect for logical discourse “brainwashed”, is extremely disrespectful. Of course, it might explain why you seem to think a “debate” would happen when Nick Griffin comes over, since you don’t know how to recognise one.

Inviting over racists who advocate violence will almost invariably lead down a very dangerous road.

But let’s pretend there’s no real world consequences to racism and homophobia, eh? The only moral that matters is freedom to a platform. Nothing else in the slightest.

What? I should say making claims like that warrant backing up in general, if not with facts, then at least with logic, which I’ve been doing and you sorely lack. And you’re still not dealing with 90% of the points I raised. You are an extremely direspectful and arrogant man.

What does that video have to do with anything? As I said earlier, the BNP had a surge in membership despite that. Showing someone up as a fool doesn’t work if people are receptive to their message. Goodness knows how many idiots gain popularity in the states politically. It was just on the radio today going through ridiculous things Rick Perry and Herman Cain have said.

Do we have to point out the difference between giving a platform and legal freedom of speech again? Apparently we do,.

Extra free speech for fascists!

No. Not in the slightest.

…would NOT want to live in a society….

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire

Sean, follow the link above and down towards the end of the most recent thread that quote is dealt with nicely. It’s such a stupid quote I have never fathomed how it’s lasted so long.The mind boggles!!!

Freedom of speech != Platform to spew hatred. Otherwise we have to let everyone who wants to speak at UCC ever speak or we’re called Fascists.

It’s pure idiocy.

I like how people are disliking comments that are plainly fucking factual now.

Urgh, once again, that quote is NOT by Voltaire. UTFSE on it.

And this has nothing to do with free speech. Free speech does not and never has extended to publically funded platforms, these are prestiges and not an entitlement to everyone. This is very obvious and has been pointed out numerous times now.

Sean O’Keefe, I’m really starting to want to punch everyone that uses that quote. Read above. Also, there was a context to that quote.

I like how, once again, people “dislike” a comment that merely factually corrects them on something. It is not a quote that actually comes from Voltaire and the fact that people use it anyway shows that they’re not really thinking at all.

Because your comment isn’t factual Leigh. In fact, is is disingenuous. Nick Griffin was ‘invited’ by UCC. It’s entirely at their discretion who to invite. Not anyone can just request a platform and be given it – But if someone is invited to speak, then they have that right to do so.

I don’t think anyone supporting Griffin’s right to speak actually support his views. The man is clearly a bigot – But he has been invited, and has the right to speak – where his views can be ‘challenged’ in public.

As for your comments getting thumbs down – that is freedom of expression. Something you’re going to have to live with I’m afraid.

Leigh you’re on a public forum arguing against a violence promoting fascist being afforded the opportunity to participate in a public debate and you are threatening violence yourself against other contributors to this discussion.
Does that not make you a hypocrite?

I didn’t threaten violence to anyone, and saying I did is massively dishonest. I said I felt like punching people for quoting something without any knowledge of where it comes from and what it means. I didn’t say I would. I think, frankly, I’m at least allowed to feel that way and it just shows how pro-freedom of expression you really are when push comes to shove. Unlike Nick Griffin – I’m no danger to anyone.

And Sean, it’s my freedom of expression to say that you’re fucking idiots, massively and almost sociopathically insensitive towards minorities. You reek of privilege.

Why are you writing (sic) in your own comment? You use (sic) which means “thus” or “like so” when quoting somebody else whose writing has deviated from standard spelling or grammar.

Well said Stephen, give them enough rope it always works in the end.

The Socialist Workers Party wants us to join Britain in some fangled federation. I’d say that the BNP view of it would be quiet similar. We would be all equals at the start but after a very short time, we and the Scots, Welsh,etc would be on the sideline. Same aul, same aul.

Where is the evidence for this! How do you know that will happen?

Many of those in the against camp have *real experience* standing up to these kinds of people and even attending these kinds of debate, yet people like you call them the “real fascists” since you’re more in favour of being a clever dick than making the right call.

That’s not what’s going to happen. People are already aware of racism, and have some idea of what the BNP is about. Giving someone a platform gives a bigot a chance to instill confidence in those who would be embarrassed to express their views otherwise. After all, if you can be a bigot and still be invited to serious debates, why not be a bigot?

It’s not just education, but social discouragement that downplays racism. By giving him a platform you are saying that even someone who is politically “clueness” deserves a podium as someone who is politically competent. Not only are you encouraging racism – but playing to the disgusting anti-intellectual attitude that is already ripe in Irish culture.

Leigh how nice of you to point out “the disgusting anti-intellectual attitude that is already ripe in Irish culture” and how unable the Irish people are to make their own minds up , how gracious of you to protect us dumb fools from ourselves. Please tell us what else would you like to block or ban?

Joe, why should I have confidence in people who do not understand the disctinction between protesting a platform and “Banning” someone’s free speech altogether?

Ironically this argument in of itself shows serious shortcomings in the Irish mentality’s ability to deal with logical debate.

Why should I have so much faith in people in the first place? Where is the evidence for this?

There are people here who actually have dealth with issues such as this in the past, yet their knowledge isn’t valued at all. Of course they’re more likely to know better with these things, and the reason I call people anti-intellectual is because they refuse it. You are clueless. You are most likely a sheltered, white heterosexual cisgendered male who does not have many years of dealing with racism/fascism.

It is a symptom of the same idiotic relativism. Some people do indeed know better than the general Irish public.

Leigh you assume far too much about other people, but when your position is questioned you ask for evidence!
I have plenty *real experience* in dealing with people like the BNP in Germany, where I’ve spent most of my adult life. I remember the popularity of the right wing amongst German Youth with similar backgrounds to the supporters of the BNP after the reunification of Germany.
My experience with with this subject is to meet it head on in open discussion like they did in Germany to the Die Republikaner.

Someone has made a good point later on that one weekend Griffin was “destroyed” in a debate, the party had a huge insurgence in membership.

“I’d just like to point out that when Nick Griffin appeared on Questions and Answers that time in the run up to the 2010 UK general election, he was roundly defeated and humiliated. That week the British Nazi Party reported nearly a doubling in membership.”

What do you say to this? Do you even have an argument?

And we’re not talking about people who “Lived in Germany” which is apparently some kind of qualification now, but have actually made a career out of going toe to toe with these people.

Leigh now you are just being silly.

Reada this is not PC nonsense censorship does not work,in fact it does the opposite. People have very short memories or they are simply too young to remember the SF media ban here and in the UK , did that work? well it did, but in favor of SF.

It’s not PC nonsense, Réada. People will listen & debate him down. I believe that after he speaks, he will continue to have no support here in Ireland. People will better understand his hatred & intolerance & say “I ain’t having any of that”.

Wonder what would be the effect of presenting him with an audience entirely or mostly made up of non-white people? That’s the only way I can think of exposing him, as he would have to tell THAT audience what he really intends is for them to go away, learn ‘their proper (inferior) place in the order of things,’ or failing that, die. Those are difficult things to phrase in a reasonable way.

I have a very good memory Joe and Declan and have also developed a bit of a knack of reading between the lines. I wouldn’t have needed to ask the second commentator, Paul McAndrew, to this thread to expand on his reasons!!! I can see through PC BS a mile off.

There’s no conversing with these kind of guys as I’ve discovered. And there’s plenty in Ireland ATM where his words would be music to their ears. As i said yesterday most Irish racism is motivated by ignorance and fear of lack, not feelings of superiority like this guy has to spout. I don’t want him giving them any ideas. I wish we could turn “fear of lack” to “lack of fear”.

I’ve a lot to do today but I’ll be back later and my report cards wont be as kind as Enda’s ones for his ministers! Bye!

Cheers Reada have a good Christmas.

Strawman argument. Why would they invite you to a debate, or me. You can just turn up though and participate though.

But why would they invite Nick Griffin to a debate?

He is not politically competent. Just because he has supporters doesn’t make him relevant or intelligent.

Also, let’s not forget that you are endorsing the idiotic, morally bankrupt definition of Free Speech where ANY violation of it, even if it can be shown not to make any logical sense to be a violation, makes you a “Fascist”.

Tim – essentially Nick is suitable for this debate, ironically, because of Media exposure and little else. If someone with a very good argument, something to share wanted to do a talk and had no chance of encouraging racism or violence, they would be more likely to be shot down.

There’s something particularly sick about that. There’s nothing wrong with thinking racism is wrong and shouldn’t be encouraged. Nobody is advocating locking up Nick Griffin for “thought Crime”.

Or even have someone intelligence like Chomsky. I don’t always agree with everything he says and may end up opposed to him on this – but at least he’ll have an argument and respect for those who can be affected.

Listen to this man. One trend here is that the “let him speak” comments are coming from sheltered middle class “Liberals”, whereas many speaking out against know that fascism is more than just denying someone a platform, and how dangerous racism can be. They have personal experience, but as usual the Irish are acting anti-intellectual bothers with regards these issues.

”The NUS leadership stated that the reason for the policy was to prevent Lesbian and Gay people and people from ethnic minority backgrounds from not attending the NUS Annual Conference for the fear that they would be assaulted by BNP members.”

Well put, Kurt. Anyone who falls for this abstract ‘free speech’ mantra is merely making the BNP the equivalent of any other political party or grouping. It is not. It is an extremist, racist, anti-Semitic, anti-rights and totalitarian party which wants to destroy democracy, including ALL rights.

Here’s what these people may be saying in the future: “I defended Griffin’s right to speak with such passion that he has now taken away mine — and all my other hard-won rights.”

Kurt I understand what you are saying but where do you set the parameters for freedom of expression?
What I find interesting is the fact that the BNP share a lot of “values” with religious organizations in this country and the UK yet the churches are allowed to spill their own bigotry and hatred without any kind of rebuke.

Correct. The Roman Catholic church has been & still is the most anti gay organisation on the planet. They treated women disgracefully over time. Right wing attitude from the RCC ? I think so. Their stance has done nothing but add to & promote homophobia & misogyny.

The Roman Catholic Church gave up beating people half to death with hammers quite a long time ago. Not relevant.

No they don’t beat anyone to death these days or burn people at the stake, but are partial to raping children and brainwashing them even today. They contribute to the spread of HIV by expressly forbidding the use of condoms. They condemn Homosexuality,birth control,embryonic stem cell research and abortion, the list goes on and on, so cannot you see the similarities?

Amazed that you’ve saved your insults for the “snot nosed kids”? No insults for Nick Griffen??? Amazing!

………. ‘scusi while I wipe my nose………… oh wait now, I did have something else to say………………wtf was it?

Don’t use your sleeve William. Sean may not approve.

Thank Leigh. The cavalry has arrived! Have serious amount of shopping to do today or Santy’ll kill me. I’ll leave this in your capable hands. Some of them are alright, they just cant see through the PC mist. Sock it to them!!!

More free speech than ordinary people for racists!

Sinn Fein?

Indeed!

This is what worries me about denying people the right to speak, when they are invited to, in a club’s facility, which they have the right to use.

Unfortunately there are people like Desmond out there, who if they get half the chance would start banning and disrupting parties or groups where ever possible. Will the Socialist Party, or the SWP or the Greens be next on his list.

The self appointed moral and ethical guardians made this country a bleak place in the 50′s, with their censorship and shouting down others. Do Not Let Their Modern Counterparts Win.

Think for yourself, always question and don’t follow blindly.

Tim, you are for advocating the obliteration of ALL Morals, completely, utterly in all it’s sociopathic glory.

The only moral you have *any* time for is this supposed “Freedom of Speech”

People on your side have continually shown they do not care for the safety of minorities or LGBTs . That’s not a valid position – it’s sociopathy.

So I’m a Sociopath now am I.

I would respectfully suggest that that is a condition that might be closer to your Bourgeoisie heart than mine.

People like you Leigh come with pre-conceived notions on pretty much everything. It is the blanket ideology and the blindness that it inspires that I am against.

To state in all seriousness that I am “you are for advocating the obliteration of ALL Morals, completely, utterly in all it’s sociopathic glory.”

That is a profoundly disturbing train of thought from you, a desire for conformity with all that you think and anyone who disagrees is a sociopath.

The next logical step for you is to call me a “fascist” and then demand that I have no platform and that is what you would do as well if ye could. Griffin is a sideshow to that truth and that is why people are concerned by the likes of you.

Valid points Tim.
The issues the speech tyrannts have not addressed:
-Freedom of speech cannot just be extended to those with the same view
-Who gets to decide who has and who hasn’t the right to speak publicly
-Who gets to decide what subjects can and can’t be discussed publicly
-Limiting freedom of expression presupposes that the general public lack the intellectual rigour to digest flawed, bigoted or socially damaging rhetoric. Therefore is more of an indictment of society in general rather than a bigoted politcial activist.

@ Sean
Allow me to address some of the points you have not noticed being already addressed.

“-Freedom of speech cannot just be extended to those with the same view”

Indeed, no one here wants to limit freedom of speech. Everyone, including NG are free to walk around and talk in Ireland in any way they want. They can organise their own events and rallies as is their entitlement. This is about protesting an INVITATION to speak at a prestigious platform, it is entirely removed from freedom of speech.
No one has a problem with the opinions or arguments, we just don;t want to lend legitimacy to racists.

-Who gets to decide who has and who hasn’t the right to speak publicly

No one, everyone can speak publicly, this is not up for question. Even NG. We do however have a problem with him being INVITED to speak at a university platform at cost to all students at the university including non-white students, LGBT and Jewish students. This is highly inappropriate and seeing as the BNP have a history of violence around events like this, it is again, highly inappropriate to host. Also not to mention that UCC isn;t actually public, it is a private institution. And again, no one is stopping anyone from speaking publicly, everyone is free to do this and has the same means available to them as everyone else.

-Who gets to decide what subjects can and can’t be discussed publicly

No one, everything can be discussed publicly, there is no question whatsoever about that.
We just don’t want to, while in the process of debating interesting and sensitive issues, lend any legitimacy or attention to individuals or groups who are actively damaging and violent to society.
There is no problem with the issue here, the problem is with not wanting to make NG look in any way legitimate and this is all that will be achieved with this event going ahead.

-Limiting freedom of expression presupposes that the general public lack the intellectual rigour to digest flawed, bigoted or socially damaging rhetoric.

No, it is about not wanting LGBT, Jewish and non white people to get beaten up. SImple as. And this is no stretch of the imagination, this happens VERY regularly with the BNP in the UK, it is really horrible and we really don’t want to see it happen in Ireland. Racism destroys lives and communities and can take decades to fix. We know the general public aren’t racist but a small percentage, are. Allowing this sort of “politics” to be taken in any way seriously does nothing but encourage and empower people who already hold racist views and when this happens, throughout history, people get hurt. This is a fact.
I for one do have faith in students, I think that the vast majority would simply detest everything NG has to say and I don’t think many are going to be in the slightest bit swayed by them. What I worry about is racist organisations that are already present here in Ireland would start to feel a bit braver and get more active. This is a very real threat that can be prevented by people taking a no tolerance approach to racism.
**********************************************************************************************************************

Final question: Would you support or oppose a convicted serial rapist from being invited to speak at a seminar for rape victims on the issue of women’s empowerment?

If you would oppose such an invitation, would you consider this an infringement on the rapists freedom of speech?

Tim, you’ve already called me and people of my opinion fascists.

And it’s still a fact that you do not care for or accept the reality of violence and discrimination against minorities, in the slightest. You have rejected all morals in favour of your version of “free speech”. You have been unable to demonstrate how this untrue and just went off on another predictable “you’re the real fascists” rant.

What does this even have to do with “conformity”? There is nothing more disgusting than when someone who does not support true diversity uses language like that. Nobody is more a victim of conformity than people such as myself.

Unfortunately in modern politics, not supporting neo-liberal economics, or not supporting the imaginary rights of racists to a greater platform than the average person, makes you a “conformist”.

And please do not talk about “Blanket” morality when you use free speech to cover absolutely everything, not thinking of any individual cases where acting so blindly might cause harm to others.

William, if a rapist was invited by the organisers of a debate to participate then that is up to them. If anyone else attends or participates that is also up to them.
Censorship does not work. It did not work in the north, when restrictions were placed on Sinn Fein and all other groups representing paramilitaries.
I lived and worked in Britain for 12 years. Sometimes alongside members of the NF & C18. They are idiots and most British people know this. There opinions and views do not stand up even to casual discussions.
A moderately informed open society is better served by encouraging open debate with people of this mindset. It is when their views are only discussed in the darkened corners of our society that they are likely to get traction.
Do you believe it acceptable to censor the views of a LGBT advocate because their opinions might be considered offensive by their audience?
Is it right to censor a Muslim or Jewish cleric who believes a LGBT lifestyle is immoral?
Is it right to censor a Syrian or Palestinian activist who advocates armed resistence against oppression?

For the last time, this is not about censorship. Censorship would be if Nick Griffin had no way of speaking out. This is not the case.

Can you explain in a bit more detail Paul?

The GPP Soc does not get any benefit from sensationalism. The debate is held for students who have their own views and have to learn to work alongside/challenge those with different views, ours important for.the students from an academic perspective. The Sociology Society tried to get a neo-nazi who denied the holocaust to speak in UCC before but out didn’t go ahead out of security concerns. This is important for academics to help them understand and write about the extreme right wing and how it has changed and still managed to survive in Europe despite it’s deep unpopularity with most people. People don’t think these guys have a great view of the future, they exist and in order to put across asn alternative view, you must understand their argument.

HTF has being gay ,his visit & your safety any relevance in this debate.?

Correct Lamb & Chicken Ball Ann. Him speaking is no threat to anyone. I disagree with what he has to say, but he is entitled to have his say in our society where we have freedom of speech, expression & opinion. It is important for people to hear him so people understand & can confront his views.

52 dislikes, really? If a gay person genuinely feels threatened, then there could be an issue there. I can’t imagine what kind of utter tool would actively click the “dislike” button on that.

Lamb, why is it necessary to bring Nick Griffin over here to study racism and fascism?

Do the Occupy camps need to bring IMF officials into the camps to prove the evils of Neoliberalism?

No.

The problem is that people like Nick Griffin don’t debate, they just throw out slogans. Unfortunately, those slogans are designed in a way that get a rise out of those who may not be racist, but finding themselves leaning towards racism. Classic propoganda tactics. Bringing that into a *debate* is a ridiculous idea – you would have a much better debate on the notion having it without him, and instead getting someone in to speak who has a real understanding of fascist politics.

You can learn plenty from Nick Griffin from that large amounts of media exposure this supposedly censored man has gotten. You don’t need to invite him over to spread propoganda, because that’s all that’ll happen. There will be no “debate”.

You do realise that NG comes with quite an unpleasant entourage yes?
I think it is these delightful skinheads that OP is worried about, not so much a few words from a deranged lunatic.
All you valiant guardians of free speech seem to completely overlook this fact. The BNP DO have a violent following, if you invite their leader, you invite the grunts also..

For the record, he’s invited to UCC not to Cork. I very much doubt Griffin would have the balls to get on a soapbox in Daunt Square and spout his vile, racist bile.

I like how this person points out a fact that likely debunks the notion that taking him down a notch will deliver a real blow to him, and they get dislikes, and nobody can counter what they say.

Points were made for comparison & to show that the BNP are not alone in being intolerant, Kurt.

The issue is freedom of expression.

The issue is that there is a difference between freedom of speech and giving a platform to a group or person that is intent on encouraging hate and violence toward others.