Should Golden Dawn, Jobbik, the NPD and other such neonazi parties be banned

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

yes, IMO.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I think banning them would make them more popular, no?

You could think that, but would you be right? If Jobbik had been been banned in the outset, would the current Hungarian political scene be so noxious?

I'm uncomfortable at the idea of allowing space in our legislatures to the spewers of hate-speech. I understand to the North Americans the issue is more abstract, but we are allowing what are effectively criminal enterprises a platform.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Fighting Fascism by restricting free speech, nothing ironic here!

wow so deep imo

maybe antifa are the true fascists lol

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The thing is with a lot of these parties - Dawn and Jobbik in particular - is that banning them would be more effective than banning say, Thaskin's party (whatever it's called nowadays) which is a personal machine. The appeal with these neo-nazi groups is with their branding. Members march their marches, wave their flags and arrange themselves into cells. That's what the Nazis did - create a flag, gave people a chance to wave it around subsume themselves into nazism. Almost quaint, were it not for the hate they preached. And of course, nobody here (I hope not anyway) would deny that after the war - free speech be damned! - the spectre of nazism had to eliminated entirely. Its organisations were disbanded, their members purged from institutions and its literature burnt. Banning Golden Dawn and its marches, paraphanalia and organised meetings would be no different from that, merely preemptive.

I see no harm in breaking that up - I'm a utilitarian and I see no greater good to society to allowing these organised thugs legitimacy in parliaments; much like I wouldn't care if other organised groups of criminals like the Mafia tried to form a political party and were banned.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

No "wannabee communist" about SWE my friend. He's the real deal.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The thing is with a lot of these parties - Dawn and Jobbik in particular - is that banning them would be more effective than banning say, Thaskin's party (whatever it's called nowadays) which is a personal machine. The appeal with these neo-nazi groups is with their branding. Members march their marches, wave their flags and arrange themselves into cells. That's what the Nazis did - create a flag, gave people a chance to wave it around subsume themselves into nazism. Almost quaint, were it not for the hate they preached. And of course, nobody here (I hope not anyway) would deny that after the war - free speech be damned! - the spectre of nazism had to eliminated entirely. Its organisations were disbanded, their members purged from institutions and its literature burnt. Banning Golden Dawn and its marches, paraphanalia and organised meetings would be no different from that, merely preemptive.

I see no harm in breaking that up - I'm a utilitarian and I see no greater good to society to allowing these organised thugs legitimacy in parliaments; much like I wouldn't care if other organised groups of criminals like the Mafia tried to form a political party and were banned.

Be nice to Dawn:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_(Iceland)

That alliance of parties never made sense to me.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

It prevents hate speech from being legitimised, I see no contradiction to my views.