It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:12 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:07 am 
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 6:20 am
Posts: 586
All views are justifiable to a certain extent. The white supremacist groups could argue that curbing the black population would lead to less strain on the world's resources, and allow the rest of the world to live a better quality life. However, racism cannot be justified through any means. It is too wrong on a fundamental level. Furthermore, your paragraph completely lacks a justification for BNP not being extremist. Having justified views does not excuse a "political party whose views stray from convention of that society and whose messages are commonly laced with racist overtones and violence" from being classified as extreme.

The oppositions second paragraph is point blank rejected by historical examples of, to name a few, NSDAP and Hamas, that was elected into power, while other parties such as the IRA have proven to gain large amounts of public support. Seeing as the second paragraph's entire basis is theory and is entirely disproved by historical examples, I feel that this point is moot.

"One should be able to say anything or speak anything." This is wrong, as hate speech has been outlawed in most if not all democratic countries.

One of the primary reasons why EPPs should be banned is from running for political office is that if they are elected, their governments are failures, economically, politically, and morally, which is frankly unacceptable. Extremist political parties, because of their extremist views, use power that they might obtain through elections in terrible ways. Hamas is a group that is based around the belief that Israel should be destroyed, and commonly act on their word. They are an obstacle in the way of peace in the region, and as a direct cause of the parties extremism, resources are wasted and lives are lost and if not for the Palestinian National Authority, the entirety of Palestine would be a war machine with one sole goal, in shedding Israeli blood. The Na.zi Party tried to purify the world by exterminating the Jewish population, and declaring war upon the world. Clearly, extremist parties do succeed in their campaigns, and when they succeed, the people they are supposed to govern and the people they hate suffer as a result of the very nature of extremist political parties. To remove this possibility, it is prudent to ban EPPs from running for office.

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:43 am 
Major
Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am
Posts: 2766
Location: Bangalore, India
Gender: male
Quote:
All views are justifiable to a certain extent. The white supremacist groups could argue that curbing the black population would lead to less strain on the world's resources, and allow the rest of the world to live a better quality life. However, racism cannot be justified through any means. It is too wrong on a fundamental level. Furthermore, your paragraph completely lacks a justification for BNP not being extremist. Having justified views does not excuse a "political party whose views stray from convention of that society and whose messages are commonly laced with racist overtones and violence" from being classified as extreme.


So if any party justifies racism and argues for white supremacy, dont vote for it. However even today, the KKK does exist in the US. They do express their views. What I am against is curbing ones right to express their views however disagreeable it might be. Your views are yours alone. Secondly I did not even attempt to justify BNPs views as not extremist. I was merely venturing into a line of thought that could actually make the BNP seem not extremist, from a BNP point of view. I meant to point out the fact that what extremism is, is subjective.

Quote:
The oppositions second paragraph is point blank rejected by historical examples of, to name a few, NSDAP and Hamas, that was elected into power, while other parties such as the IRA have proven to gain large amounts of public support. Seeing as the second paragraph's entire basis is theory and is entirely disproved by historical examples, I feel that this point is moot.


Again you are thinking about it from your point of view alone. The Hamas, IRA etc HAD widespread public support. So in their respective societies, they are not a problem. IF they were a problem, under a democratic framework, they would stand no chance. But fact is that they have public support. In their respective societies they are not considered extremist or disagreeable. That is why they have support. But lets say you have a party that you see as being extremist, but having widespread support. What do you do? Ban them from contesting elections or take away their freedom of speech and expression? Isnt THAT an extremist activity? Isnt that what extremists ACTUALLY do? You cannot curb so called extremism by adopting an extremist approach. Everything should be based on freedom of choice of the majority.

Quote:
"One should be able to say anything or speak anything." This is wrong, as hate speech has been outlawed in most if not all democratic countries.


It could be. But you cannot term anything as a hate speech. Everyone can speak whatever they want. If you find something as spreading hatred, you file a public interest litigation and fight it out in court the democratic way. You dont go ban the person from speaking.

Quote:
One of the primary reasons why EPPs should be banned is from running for political office is that if they are elected, their governments are failures, economically, politically, and morally, which is frankly unacceptable. Extremist political parties, because of their extremist views, use power that they might obtain through elections in terrible ways. Hamas is a group that is based around the belief that Israel should be destroyed, and commonly act on their word. They are an obstacle in the way of peace in the region, and as a direct cause of the parties extremism, resources are wasted and lives are lost and if not for the Palestinian National Authority, the entirety of Palestine would be a war machine with one sole goal, in shedding Israeli blood. The Nazi Party tried to purify the world by exterminating the Jewish population, and declaring war upon the world. Clearly, extremist parties do succeed in their campaigns, and when they succeed, the people they are supposed to govern and the people they hate suffer as a result of the very nature of extremist political parties. To remove this possibility, it is prudent to ban EPPs from running for office.


Yes extremist parties do succeed every now and then. But you have to understand that they are considered extremist only in hindsight. IF they are perceived as being extremist right from day one, then they wont stand a chance in a democracy, unless the people in the democracy are extremist themselves. In that case, there is no question about extremism cuz the party that contests and the people that vote, have similar mindsets. Also extremism like I said before is a matter of perspective. For example, you quote Hamas as an example of extremism. What if that is solely your point of view? From a Palestinians point of view, Israel bombs them and massacres them. We all know that Israel is a Zionist nation whose sole purpose is to cater to the needs, culture, heritage and well being of Jews and Jews alone. There IS lots of racism and anti arabism in Israel which is a fact. The law of return being one. Citizenship and Nationality being two different things etc., That for me is extremist too. So what do we do? Dissolve the state of Israel? Because CLEARLY they are not helping the peace situation in the region in any way. Coming to the Nazi party, yes they were an immoral and violent group that commited genocide. And yes they had public support. But they were not considered extremist back then by the majority of the people. They were considered patriots and what not.

_________________
Deadman - SYN
----------------
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 3:12 am 
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 6:20 am
Posts: 586
"Your views are yours alone" is a pretty thought in an ugly world. It is undeniable that expressing ones views causes others to identify with you, and thus we should discourage the expression of immoral views. Furthermore, extremism is not subjective in the sense that parties that are extremist (exonym) or radicalists (endonym) will identify themselves as such, as seen in the BNP's admission that they are far-right. They have labeled themselves as far-right. Their actions label themselves as far-right. They are extremists. Moreover, I would like to discourage definition arguments that add nothing to the debate and derail the entire prompt. If there is a better definition, I would gladly take it into account, but you have not offered such, and thus the argument should be based upon the definition set by our side in order to preserve quality of debate. (<-actually serious.)

Your second paragraph once again reverts to an original point made my my side. You state that "Everything should be based on freedom of choice of the majority." However, we see that when majority is given the freedom of choice, the results are disastrous, seen in the Hamas, IRA etc. Therefore, the majority should not be given the freedom of choice to elect parties that will harm themselves and the societies around them.

Quote:
It could be. But you cannot term anything as a hate speech. Everyone can speak whatever they want. If you find something as spreading hatred, you file a public interest litigation and fight it out in court the democratic way. You dont go ban the person from speaking.

Le Pen, the leader of the National Front of France has been fought in court many, many ways. And yet, he continues to use racist remarks to convey his point. Unless you are in defense of people making racist remarks, your point is invalidated. And if so, I would like to draw your attention to laws made by the European Union such as the Gayssot Act. Hate speech is defined as "any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group." Allow me to draw your attention to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law". Hate speech is against human rights, and it is and should continue to be limited whereever the law allows.

mfreak wrote:
Yes extremist parties do succeed every now and then. But you have to understand that they are considered extremist only in hindsight. IF they are perceived as being extremist right from day one, then they wont stand a chance in a democracy, unless the people in the democracy are extremist themselves. In that case, there is no question about extremism cuz the party that contests and the people that vote, have similar mindsets. Also extremism like I said before is a matter of perspective. For example, you quote Hamas as an example of extremism. What if that is solely your point of view? From a Palestinians point of view, Israel bombs them and massacres them. We all know that Israel is a Zionist nation whose sole purpose is to cater to the needs, culture, heritage and well being of Jews and Jews alone. There IS lots of racism and anti arabism in Israel which is a fact. The law of return being one. Citizenship and Nationality being two different things etc., That for me is extremist too. So what do we do? Dissolve the state of Israel? Because CLEARLY they are not helping the peace situation in the region in any way. Coming to the Nazi party, yes they were an immoral and violent group that commited genocide. And yes they had public support. But they were not considered extremist back then by the majority of the people. They were considered patriots and what not.
This is false. Hamas campaigned on the basis of being an extremist political party (they called themselves radicalists, the endonym for extremists). And once again, we return to my definition (seeing as a better one has not yet been offered).

A political party whose views stray from convention of that society and whose messages are commonly laced with racist overtones and violence.

Both the Nazi party and Hamas are extremists by above definition. Furthermore, there is racism and anti-arabism in Israel, but this is not relevant to the prompt, which states that extremist governments shouldn't run for office. Furthermore, the Nazi party were not perceived of being extremists because they used the methods you yourself stated earlier on, propoganda and appeal to patriotism. They had extremist ideals, but the people were not able to see through the mask of pretty words they used. The Nazi Party was based upon extremist thoughts, and thus they should have been banned from running for office. Furthermore, you state that "Coming to the Nazi party, yes they were an immoral and violent group that commited genocide. And yes they had public support. But they were not considered extremist back then by the majority of the people. They were considered patriots and what not." With this in mind, since the majority of people were not able to determine the true intentions of the Nazi party, you prove my point in that EPPs should not be allowed to run for office as the people are unable to make a decision.

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 5:12 am 
Major
Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am
Posts: 2766
Location: Bangalore, India
Gender: male
It is not for you to decide what is immoral and what isnt. What is immoral according to you may not be immoral for someone else. Extremism IS subjective. Parties like BNP do not exist without people that identify with its policies. Such people may be considered extremists by people like you that dont agree with the BNP. However, there are people that support the BNP for whom being far right is not extremism, but probably right. Your views are biased, because you have deemed something as right, and something as wrong. Take a neutral stance and you will see that extremism is subjective. It depends on perspective and circumstance. It CANNOT have a clear definition.

Who are YOU, to decide what is detrimental or disastrous? The Hamas might be a disastrous according to Israel. But they might be considered awesome in Palestine. Saying people should not be given a right to choose something YOU deem wrong, is an authoritarian view. It is extremist. People can choose what they want, be it good or bad. You cannot and I repeat CANNOT, take away freedom of choice, even though YOU dont agree with it.

Yeah so Le Pen was brought to court many many times. Do the same thing. I DID say, go on to sue someone and try them for hate crimes if they incite violence through hate speeches. But nevertheless, they have a right to speak. In free countries where democracy is the norm, even though you have to be politically correct, people have a right to express their views. You can quote any law, but even in Le Pen's case, you will see that his freedom to speak and exptress himself freely has not been taken away. Anyone can freely express his/her views and if you find it offensive it is your freedom to go and sue them. However you cannot tell them they dont have a right to express themselves. That is against human rights and as such very narrowminded. I am not for racist remarks or actions, but if someone is racist there is no reason he cant speak up for what he believes in. Yes he will get prosecuted for it, however, as a citizen of a free country he does have his rights. Which no one can take away.

Again, you are looking at it from a biased point of view. Your arguments are flawed because you have set standards - as to what is acceptable, what is moderate, what is extremist, what is moral or immoral. You have already taken sides and you are not debating from a neutral stand point. Therefore you fail to look at both sides of the argument. You are simply claiming that the Nazis and Hamas are extremist and therefore parties like that are immoral and spread disaster and therefore should be banned from contesting elections or expressing themselves or creating public opinion. According to you Hamas is radical. Uh, yeah, mine too. But according to the people of Palestine, they are not. They have simply claimed to be an Islamic political party. They havent called themselves "extremist", something that you think they are. They operate based on radical Islam, which people in that region like. So if Hamas contested elections in India, am sure they will lose. But they are not doing that are they? They are there in palestine where the people WANT them. Therefore they should not be banned because they represent their people and they have support. You shouldnt impose your values on someone else. This is like expecting Iraq to follow american value systems, which is ridiculous. Again you do agree that it isnt possible to determine anyones true intentions. And then you go on to claim that you can identify what is extremist and what isnt? Doesnt that prove to you that you are simply operating based on your own personal opinion? Infact here, it is YOU that is being extremist, because you choose to enforce your personal opinion on someone else and take away their freedom because YOU deem that is it is good for them. You dont know that.

_________________
Deadman - SYN
----------------
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 5:21 am 
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 6:20 am
Posts: 586
Your argument boils down singularly to extremism is subjective and thus we cannot ban, y/n?

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:23 am 
Major
Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am
Posts: 2766
Location: Bangalore, India
Gender: male
Yes. And I have given examples from India, Israel-Palestine situation and I have also pointed out flaws in your argument. What is considered extremist in one place, may not be considered as such in another place. While I do agree with you and am against the Hamas, Le Pen and other examples you cited, it is only because my opinion is same as yours. There might be millions who support these guys. In the end whether he is right or wrong, extremist or not, he has his freedom of speech and expression. That shouldn't be tampered with. Let the people he appeals to make their choice. Lets not deem what is right or wrong FOR them. People do have a right to make their own decisions.

_________________
Deadman - SYN
----------------
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:42 am 
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 6:20 am
Posts: 586
Ok while i do agree with you on the point that extremism is subjective, it sort of nullifies the entire basis of the argument and turns this into a fairly meaningless definition bicker over 'extremism'. Can we carry on debate and list more points assuming that people can identify extremists? I mean, we know that nazism or BNP or whatever are extremists. If they fall into the category of the definition I listed, can we please just classify them as extremists?

The way I will reply to your posts depends on your answer to above.

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: Extremist political parties
PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:41 am 
Major
Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am
Posts: 2766
Location: Bangalore, India
Gender: male
Sure we can. Just that I run out of points to argue for them. Cuz even I dont agree with these guys lol.

_________________
Deadman - SYN
----------------
Image


Top
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Copyright Tacticsoft Ltd. 2008   
Updated By phpBBservice.nl