THE SILENCING OF MR GRIFFIN
I think the furore over Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time has been wholly disproportionate and indeed for those seeking to oppose his appearance by shouting slogans and waving placards outside Television Centre, counterproductive.
The left has a long tradition of seeking to shut people up. I am old enough to remember when it was nigh on impossible for a conservative speaker to gain a fair hearing on British University campuses, speakers usually being greeted with a variety of zoo noises and the odd rotten egg or bag of flour. I witnessed Keith Joseph receive just such treatment during the mid 1970’s. No fan of the somewhat bewildered and extraordinarily other worldly Mr Joseph, I remember though feeling uneasy at the time, for was it not better to engage in debate? However what increasingly became clear is that many on the left were less interested in engaging with ideas than in silencing ideas that they found inconvenient or repugnant. The standard formula being ‘no platform for………………………'you fill in the appropriate category. In this of course they are mirroring the far right. To understand this you only have to perform what Martin Amis called a thought experiment, try substituting ‘no platform for the BNP’ with abortionist or Gay rights activists and you get the picture. In this way an unelected and unrepresentative minority get to decide the appropriate boundaries of public discourse.
I watched question time and thought the studio audience played a far more effective role in discrediting the obnoxious Mr Griffin’s world view than the hundreds of people shouting slogans and waving placards outside. However the format of the programme was such an obvious set-up that I fear in the long run it may backfire.
All of this of course is not to say that Fascism and Mr Griffin is most certainly a fascist, should not be opposed. Indeed there is a role for demonstration and mass action, should The BNP choose to hold a rally in Southall or Bangla Town this should most certainly face determined opposition, however the BNP have learnt much from the days of the National Front and are far too savvy now to employ the crude tactics of the 1970’s. If the BNP are to be effectively opposed it is going to take a great deal more thought than a hundred or so demonstrators trying to stop one man appearing on a current affairs television show. Put another way it is essential that we deal with the BNP in the current political context. Television centre is not Cable Street nor are we in the Avernal gloom of the dying days of the Weimar republic. But how much easier to shout slogans outside television centre than going to Oldham or Burnley and engaging with actual or potential BNP voters. Though on second thoughts given the constipated politically restricted mindset that passes for thought amongst so many of those seeking to identify as 'left' these days they are more likely to drive voters into the arms of the BNP.
As Bonnie Greer averred on the programme free speech is not always pretty, there is also a moral case for free speech whatever its utility, however in combating the poisonous ideology of the BNP it is our most potent weapon and we should not allow a small group of self appointed censors prevent us from employing it to maximum effect.
The left has a long tradition of seeking to shut people up. I am old enough to remember when it was nigh on impossible for a conservative speaker to gain a fair hearing on British University campuses, speakers usually being greeted with a variety of zoo noises and the odd rotten egg or bag of flour. I witnessed Keith Joseph receive just such treatment during the mid 1970’s. No fan of the somewhat bewildered and extraordinarily other worldly Mr Joseph, I remember though feeling uneasy at the time, for was it not better to engage in debate? However what increasingly became clear is that many on the left were less interested in engaging with ideas than in silencing ideas that they found inconvenient or repugnant. The standard formula being ‘no platform for………………………'you fill in the appropriate category. In this of course they are mirroring the far right. To understand this you only have to perform what Martin Amis called a thought experiment, try substituting ‘no platform for the BNP’ with abortionist or Gay rights activists and you get the picture. In this way an unelected and unrepresentative minority get to decide the appropriate boundaries of public discourse.
I watched question time and thought the studio audience played a far more effective role in discrediting the obnoxious Mr Griffin’s world view than the hundreds of people shouting slogans and waving placards outside. However the format of the programme was such an obvious set-up that I fear in the long run it may backfire.
All of this of course is not to say that Fascism and Mr Griffin is most certainly a fascist, should not be opposed. Indeed there is a role for demonstration and mass action, should The BNP choose to hold a rally in Southall or Bangla Town this should most certainly face determined opposition, however the BNP have learnt much from the days of the National Front and are far too savvy now to employ the crude tactics of the 1970’s. If the BNP are to be effectively opposed it is going to take a great deal more thought than a hundred or so demonstrators trying to stop one man appearing on a current affairs television show. Put another way it is essential that we deal with the BNP in the current political context. Television centre is not Cable Street nor are we in the Avernal gloom of the dying days of the Weimar republic. But how much easier to shout slogans outside television centre than going to Oldham or Burnley and engaging with actual or potential BNP voters. Though on second thoughts given the constipated politically restricted mindset that passes for thought amongst so many of those seeking to identify as 'left' these days they are more likely to drive voters into the arms of the BNP.
As Bonnie Greer averred on the programme free speech is not always pretty, there is also a moral case for free speech whatever its utility, however in combating the poisonous ideology of the BNP it is our most potent weapon and we should not allow a small group of self appointed censors prevent us from employing it to maximum effect.
