![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I find myself on the horns of a dilemma.
I’m trying to set up a programme of speakers for the 2013 Edinburgh Democracy User Group In the Pub meetings. One of our decisions at the planning meeting for this was to invite all the major political parties to send a speaker to talk to us about their parties core values and how they make decisions internally.
My working definition of “major” is any British party that holds a seat at the European, Westminster or Holyrood Parliaments. I’ve excluding Welsh and Northern Irish parties on the grounds of logistics, although if anyone can find a Plaid Cymru member in Edinburgh I’d be delighted to buy them a pint of Brains.
So, I’ve invited Conservative, Labour, SNP, Lib Dem, Green, Respect and UKIP speakers.
It’s not that I’m not happy to have speakers from other parties. I’d be delighted but my first objective is to invite the major parties and I wanted a rule of thumb to apply when I said I was going to spend time trying to get a speaker from X party but not as much time trying to get a speaker from Y party.
The problem is, my definition of major includes the BNP. They currently hold two seats at the European Parliament.
I’m genuinely in two minds about inviting them to speak. On the grounds that they have a democratic mandate should we engage with them. Should we deny them a platform because they are anti-democratic (and are they anti-democratic?) Are we wiser if we know our enemy or is a fool’s errand to give them a platform?
Suggestions from the floor welcome.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 01:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 01:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 01:47 pm (UTC)My intellectual position, I think, would be that if I'd made a rule then I would have to stick to it consistently. I wouldn't be able to argue to myself that anything else is democratic.
My emotional position would be that the BNP are fully human.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:05 pm (UTC)Whilst I agree that the BNP are fully human I’m not convinced that that puts me under any obligation to have any dealings with them.
(To be clear, that is not convinced = not certain either way but open to persuasion or facilitation of thinking rather than not convinced = a euphemism for I am right.)
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:08 pm (UTC)(On a similar note, having had the experience of becoming entangled with an EDL march, I would take steps to ensure an alcohol-free environment if I were going to do this.)
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:18 pm (UTC)Good call on the alcohol point.
That does, very genuinely, present me with a logisitical difficulty, in that I have no budget but can get free space at a pub in exchange for us buying drinks.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:22 pm (UTC)I’ll ask around and see if anyone knows of one.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:15 pm (UTC)In my experience, the only useful way to open minds is through human connection, which is hard. (Jeez. It's hard with people we love, never mind our political enemies.)
I don't know about culture change. I suspect that there is a huge factor in that time has passed and a generation of people has grown up with the idea that gay relationships are normal. But I couldn't say what contributed to that change, and in particular whether it is entirely emergent or whether it can be nurtured through intervention. (I know about the seatbelt legislation, but don't know how far such things can be generalised.)
(edited for mistyped words)
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-10 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-10 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 07:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:04 pm (UTC)And that's part of the underlying reasoning for my major parties heuristic. The parties on List A got elected to speak & vote in a parliament. Those on List B, didn't.
The other part being logistical but f4f3 is going to sort that out for me.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 01:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 02:47 pm (UTC)"to invite all the major political parties to send a speaker to talk to us about their parties core values and how they make decisions internally."
So, first of all, your definition does not require you to invite the BNP - you've already excluded 7 parties who are more "major" than they are (including the 4th biggest in Westminster) on purely arbitary grounds. This does not seem to be causing you much of a problem, despite all of the Irish parties having representatives within 50 miles of Scotland, and the BNP being only represented 500 miles away. Belfast, as the Fun Boy Three liked to remind us, is only half an hour away.
I am honsetly at a loss to see why you would invite the BNP and not the Irish Parties - a call to any of our universities would get you members of most of the parties.
That's my direct answer to you - your method of selection is flawed, possibly on grounds of race.
Given that your criteria is not "major" party, it's "mainland" party, what do you think the BNP will bring to the discussion? You aren't in a position of dispensing natural justice to them, and I can't see that excluding them does them any form of disservice higher than that easily done to the Irish and Welsh parties, who, IMHO, have a much more interesting story to tell.
Leaving that aside, and to slightly expand on my original response - "Ah widnae go". I consider the BNP racist by definition, and do not want to hear what they have to say. Nothing to do with not giving them a platform, or denying them a right to speak, or having them banned, I'm just not interested in hearing them speak, and would boycott any event that they were part of, or, as the parties in Scotland did at the Glasgow count, refuse to be on a platform with them.
I'm not going to give you advice on what you should do. This is a matter of conscience, and you may not share my views. If I were organising the event, I wouldn't invite them. This is an extension of my personal decision not to have anything to do with them. You might feel that you have a higher cause to serve in deciding. And while I'd disagree with that, I'd obviously respect your decision. Possibly from the crowd outside, exercising our freedom of speech to barrack some fascists.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:09 pm (UTC)What I’m not prepared to do is spend a significant amount of my time tracking down a speaker from a party without a clear and easy to find party structure in Edinburgh in the first instance when I have much easier contacts to make.
If you think that finding a member of the DUP or Sein Fein is going to be that easy I look forward to you telling me that you’ve arranged such a speaker.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:17 pm (UTC)Do the BNP really have a party structure in Edinburgh?
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:35 pm (UTC)So, whether they have a party structure or not I’m not sure. Evidence suggests they might well do and they certainly have candidates and sufficient local support to put up scrutineers.
The polled even better in Glasgow and Central Scotland.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:19 pm (UTC)http://www.britishirish.org/
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:39 pm (UTC)I’ll punt them something throught the contact form when I’m home.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 03:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 05:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 07:56 pm (UTC)I've never heard what they have to say. Difficult to judge if they are beyond the pale until I've heard them.
I'm not sure I have any special privilege to decide for other people what is or isn't acceptable speech.
There must be something about them that appeals to people. What are they offering that people don't feel they are getting elsewhere.
If I don't understand their values how can I persuade them that they can promote their values without their brusque policies.
I note that pretty much literally bombing them into the Stone Age didn't appear to put them all off. So what will make them no longer a threat.
But DUGIP may not be the right forum.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 07:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 07:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:55 pm (UTC)Not sure how to cultivate that TBH.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-10 07:47 am (UTC)Put differently, this is not a theoretical problem. It is a practical one, and as such can only be solved in practice.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-10 08:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 07:52 pm (UTC)What would you hope to get out of having a BNP speaker were you to invite one? And how likely is your aim to be successful taking into account your audience, venue etc?
If the people who come to the meeting and the speaker can have a proper conversation as
no subject
Date: 2012-10-09 08:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-10-10 04:47 pm (UTC)There are lots or organisations that don't want to associate with organisations that associate with the BNP.
It's a shame it's 2013, if you waited till 2014, problem solved, I suspect Labour turnout wont be so low next time as to let them in again, even if they hadn't collapsed electorally and internally.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-11 08:32 am (UTC)As widgetfox suggests above – I’m not sure that DUGIP is the right forum, given the practical difficulties of having a useful conversation.
no subject
Date: 2012-10-10 06:01 pm (UTC)