Let extremists visit Britain
Posted on Wednesday 6 May, 2009
Filed Under Civil Liberties
RETIRED though he was at the time, there can be no doubt as to the gravity of the crimes committed by Augusto Pinochet. Sadly, the government had no problem allowing the former military dictator to come to London for medical treatment in 1998.
Equally sadly, it had no problem with allowing him to return to his native Chile, even after the Spanish authorities lodged a provisional arrest warrant, charging him with systematic torture, murder, illegal detention, and forced disappearances.
Such a display of cowardice – motivated in part by then home secretary Jack Straw’s inability to stand up to the pressure exerted by the monetarist mass murderer’s extensive British fan club – was hardly this government’s finest hour.
More recent guests in this country have included King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, head of the wonderful petro-kleptocracy that presides over the public beheadings in Chop Square. Indeed, he is such a vital customer for BAE Systems that he even merited Her Majesty’s company for a coach ride to Buckingham Palace.
Pakistani strongman Pervez Musharraf and Chinese prime minister Wen Jiabao have also seen the red carpet rolled out in their honour. No problems there, then. It is a matter of policy that heads of state or heads of government, past or present, be allowed free access to the UK, no matter what the gravity of the depravity they sanction, perpetuate or even personally perform.
That being the case, why baulk at two-bob hot gospel preachers, minor league shock jocks, Russian boot boys and the occasional radical Islamist? Such are the manner of men that appear on Jacqui Smith’s ‘least wanted’ list of those banned from the UK, because they have said things that foster extremism or hatred.
I do not know full details of the CV of each individual. But let us take the charges as proven. It seems clear enough that without exception they promote viewpoints anybody on the consistent left is certain to find execrable. Does that mean they should be debarred from Britain? I’m not convinced by the argument advanced by Mr Straw’s successor:
… Ms Smith said granting free speech did not provide a licence to preach hatred and that those banned had “clearly overstepped the mark” with the attitudes they had expressed.
“[Naming them] enables people to see the sorts of unacceptable behaviour we are not willing to have in this country.
“Coming to this country is a privilege. We won’t allow people into this country who are going to propagate the sort of views… that fundamentally go against our values.”
At the purely practical level, there must inevitably be some limitations on freedom of speech, if only to prevent people shouting ‘fire!’ in crowded theatres. But to allow the state to set the boundaries of what is and what is not acceptable in political and religious debate is inevitably problematic.
When Smith talks about ‘our’ values, to whom exactly is she referring? In all cases, there are fringe groupings of Britons who share precisely the beliefs propagated by those she wishes to exclude. Logically, should she not propose that they somehow be gagged, too? And do not the values liberal Britons espouse, at least nominally, include precisely the right to express abhorrent viewpoints?
In the internet age, isn’t it simply ridiculous to suppose that it is possible to shield citizens from exposure to invidious sentiment, anyhow? For those attracted to the rantings of white supremacists or deranged jihadists, the content is only a click away.
Ultimately, free speech for moderate British residents is better served if UKIP supporters hear Geert Wilders, Dyab Abou Jahjah appears on Stop the War Coalition platforms, and the home secretary is not permitted to control of which foreigners are allowed to address the public.
After all, if mass murdering caudillos are welcome to see a Harley Street specialist, what can possibly be the issue with giving sundry whackjobs access to Speakers’ Corner?
<<Go back
Comments
8 Responses to “Let extremists visit Britain”
Indeed.
In fact, if you look at the criteria that the government uses to ban people, it would almost appear that they are only banning people who are critical of their policies.
Nothing remotely worrying about that, is there?
1st OXFORD WORKING CLASS BOOKFAIR
http://www.oxfordworkingclassbookfair.blogspot.com
Saturday 20 June, 11 am – 6 pm
Ruskin College, Walton Street, Oxford
We cordially invite readers to visit the 1st ever OXFORD WORKING CLASS BOOKFAIR! There will be books, talks, workshops, short films and more books and magazines . . .
We plan to recover/reclaim some of the hidden history of Oxford, with its gallery of rogues, rebels and revolutionaries, to touch upon some topics of contemporary relevance to the man & woman on the street today, provide quality entertainment, discuss the big issues past and present & hopefully have a real good time to boot! – All in a relaxed and warm atmosphere!
The range of local groups invited includes; political groups, Trade Unions, community groups, campaign groups, booksellers and history societies. If you would like to have a stall email us at the address above!
The event will include a commemoration of the hundredth anniversary of the 1909 RUSKIN COLLEGE STUDENT STRIKE, a pioneering student uprising for independent working class education, that saw students breakaway to form a radical education and self-help networks based on an alternative progressive view of what education could be. They argued that it wasn’t enough for the working class to have limited extended access to higer education, but rather that they needed a fundamentally different kind of education, curriculum & pedagogy to meet their needs and the needs of the class. They were involved in the PLEBS LEAGUE (a grassroots education iniative) and set up an anti-capitalist education network of CENTRAL LABOUR COLLEGES, many of the leaders of the student uprising were miners and trade unionists who went on to be authors of THE MINERS NEXT STEP, a classic text of rank & file trade unionism and syndicalism.
Along the way, we will learn the story of the RED SHIRTS, a group set up at Ruskin College to sabotage the attempts of Oswald Mosely’s fascist BLACK SHIRTS to get a base in 1930s Oxford & consider how we fight against fascism & racism today. There will also be sessions on culture, trade union & labour history, feminism/women’s liberation, ecology & climate, war & empire etc. More information about speakers, events and other happenings planned will appear on our page shortly – watch this space! Sponsors include the local I.W.W
It’s not what they say that’s the problem, it’s what their supporters organise. Difficult question, should they be allowed in and the debate take place? You’ll never win, there will always be people who will agree with them, they will never be unanimity in society (especially nowadays), but should the debate be gone through for the sake of the uncommitted? Or to expose their violence. Does letting violent people hate-filled people in suggest thaht they are harmless really?
I can see no logic in the argument that because one category of persons, ex heads of state or government, enjoy an unchallenged right to enter Britain it follows that everybody should. Do you believe that everybody should enjoy diplomatic immunity? The argument would be equally compelling.
Bah. Britain is proud to be a tolerant liberal country – and if these people don’t like that, then they don’t belong here.
There are plenty of people with opinions I do not like. Many of them live abroad. I do not think they become less worrisome when they travel to the UK.
There is something wrong when problematic opinions are suppressed. It looks like weakness to me.
(Of course, when the ‘problematic opinions’ take on a uniform and take to the streets then things are different.)
I’m sure that the self-appointed pastor with an animus against homosexuals would attract a rather flamboyant audience, should he show up. I wish he would.
The people on the list are all paper tigers.
Pathetic and unacceptable.
Dave,
you’re right they don’t get more bloody than Wen Jiabao.
He probably had a hand in the crushing of the Tienanmen Square demonstrators, he’s pushing for greater military expenditure at the expense of social programs, as well as being the mouthpiece of the Beijing dictatorship when Tibetans are battered & murdered by the Chinese Security machine.
Still, Western leaders often fall over themselves to glad hand him and brush China’s crimes under the carpet concerning Tibet.
“the monetarist mass murderer’s (Pinochet)) extensive British fan club”
AMEN ~ I was re-reading Andy Beckett’s interview with Alan Walters…When Brown, Blair etc., pay tribute to Thatcher, THIS is what they were grovelling before. Chile, as a proposed model for Britain… nothing “abstract” there.
On the Shoulders of “Giants”…