No Platform for the BNP!
Sheraz Qureshi explains why he thinks the Nazis shouldn't be given speaking rights at his college

It’s our university: We don’t want violence and increased tensions on campus!

Whenever the BNP are invited into a university they inevitably increase tensions on campus. This is because when fascists are invited they often bring their supporters (thugs) with them and this results in students who are ethinic minorities or homosexual being put at an increased risk of attack / verbal assault. Giving the BNP a platform also gives people who wouldn’t otherwise do so the confidence to attack others, and the reason for this is that words that that are designed to inflame tensions unsurprisingly increase the likelihood of their being physical attacks against minority groups. We say – the Student Union is like a private members club, and it has the right to invite (or not invite) whoever it wants, this means that if the Student Union perceives there to be a security risk to its members it has every right to adopt a no platform stance.

"Only one thing could have broken our movement - if our enemies had understood its principle and from the first day had smashed the nucleus of our movement with extreme brutality." A Hitler

Believing that support for the Far right can be countered through ‘debate’ is naive.

In the setting of the university, students are between the ages of 18-21 and away from home for the first time. This results in significant sections of the student population feeling isolated and alone – and in these circumstances people who are drawn to support the far right do so more out of a desperate attempt to cling to ideology in order to feel a sense of belonging rather than as a result of ‘ a rational’ thought process. Belief in far right ideology allows people who are struggling with problems relating to self-definition an opportunity to define themselves against ‘a foreign other’ and hence, to feel a sense of previously lacking purpose and superiority. The reason why this is relevant is because it demonstrates why those who believe the far rights supporters will have their minds changed through more ‘debates’ are so misguided – because of the desperate way in which far right ideology is clung to by its supporters; out debating their speakers in a public setting will not change their supporters minds.

Debating with the BNP adds a veneer of respectability to the party and their views

Part of the BNPS’ policies is to divert the publics attention away from their violent and bigoted polices – and every time the BNP are allowed to partake in a debate dressed in suites and smartly presented it helps perpetuate the image of the BNP as ‘just another political party’ and if the BNP are able to do this it means they are able to target more mainstream voters.
The reality is that the ‘suits not boots’ rhetoric is meaningless, behind closed doors the BNP are very clear about what their real aims are clear:

“ This is a life and death struggle for white survival not a fancy dress party. A little less banner waving and a little more guile wouldn’t go amiss. As long as our cadres understand the full implications of our struggle there is no need for us to do anything to give the public cause for concern. We must at all times present them with an image of moderate reasonableness. Of course we must teach the truth to the hard core, for like you I do not intend this movement to lose its way, but when it comes to influencing the public forget about genetic differences, historical revisionism or Zionism, holocaust denial and so on, all that people want to know is what can we do for them that the other parties can’t or won’t. Politics is always the art of the possible so we must judge every single policy by one simple criteria, is it realistically possible that a decisive proportion of the British people will support it, if not scale it down to our short term ambitions, to the point where the answer becomes “yes”. This is not a sell out but the only possible step further towards our goal" – Nick Griffin, leader of the BNP

There aim is to follow the model of Le Pen in France, and to become a mainstream fixture in politics – we must not allow this to happen!

"If the enemy had known how weak we were, it would probably have reduced us to jelly. It would have crushed in blood the very beginning of our work." J Goebbels

Legal precedent: Oliver Wendall

Oliver Wendall (an American supreme court judge) argued that it was legal for a man to go into a large empty field and shout "fire" at the top of his voice even if there wasn't a fire. However – if he were to do the same in crowded theatre then he was acting illegally. The reason why this case is important is because it demonstrates that in western societies freedom of speech doesn’t extend to behaving in a way that puts other people directly at risk. Fascism does put people at risk.

Fascism should not be tolerated! Facists are dedicated to destroying democracy using whatever (violent) means necessary. By allowing the Facists to speak on public platforms we allow them to rehabilitate themselves. We allow them to attempt to undo the damage that world war two and the holocaust inflicted on their public image, bu allowing them to pose as ‘respectable’ – and what’s the consequence of this? The far right then go on to win elections, and to abolish freedom for the press and democratic / human rights! We’ve seen this happen before and we cant’ allow this to happen again and that’s why it makes sense to vote for no platform!

Sheraz Qureshi
www.experimentsinliving.net