Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014
Extremist political parties, banning of
Section B. Constitutional/governance
An extremist political party could come from the extremes of the political left, but at present the most prominent are on the far right. Many European countries, such as the Netherlands, have seen a rise in support for far-right parties. Is the correct response to this to ban them? Can the restriction of democracy be justified by the harm these parties cause? A Proposition team may wish to consider how they define ’extremism’ and who would make the ultimate decisions about which parties to ban.
Pros
[1] Extremist political parties harm minorities within society by allowing prejudice and discrimination to be openly peddled. This makes minorities feel marginalised and often unsafe. Allowing the British National Party (BNP) to stand with a manifesto underpinned by racial hatred makes immigrants feel unwelcome in the UK. Banning these parties shows our desire to protect minorities and is a sign of being a civilised, inclusive society.
[2] Extremist political parties increase the amount of prejudice within society as they legitimise these views and give a platform for the dissemination of prejudice. If the National Front has the chance to campaign alongside the Socialist Party, then it appears their views are respectable and a genuine choice. As the rhetoric of the far right is often very seductive, it will use this to win support. The National Front won 17 per cent of the vote in the first ballot of the French elections in 2002, beating the Socialist Party.
[3] Extremist political parties can affect the whole political discourse. It is not possible to assume that they will not attract any popular support. In Austria, the far-right Freedom Party won 28 per cent of the vote in 1999 and formed a coalition government. Even a party which wins very few seats can find itself holding the balance of power after an election. This means they can win important concessions to join a coalition. Their presence on the ballot paper can also lead to mainstream parties being forced further to the right on issues such as immigration in an attempt to win back votes.
[4] Banning extremist political parties will be effective. A small hardcore group of people will try to continue to peddle their ideas, but it will be easy for the police to target them. Most people will not choose to break the law and will leave the party.
[5] It is possible to identify extremist parties that should be banned. Although the exact line may be blurred, there are plenty of examples of far-right parties which clearly fall over it. Concerns about the level of immigration a country can support are not the same as anti-immigration and repatriation policies underpinned by racism and xenophobia.
Cons
[1] Everyone has the right to freedom of speech. People may feel offended by the rhetoric of the far right, but a democracy should be tolerant of their views. Many countries have laws preventing the spread of racial hatred and political parties have to stay within these limits. This is a better way of controlling hate speech than banning the parties outright.
[2] Extremist political parties do not increase prejudice; they reflect prejudice in society. They may allow us to tackle racism by acting as a barometer which gives society a warning that there is a problem. They also allow for these views to be torn down in public debate. If they were to be silenced, and spread their ideas privately, then they would never be refuted. The National Front was roundly defeated in the final ballot of the 2002 French election and France was given the chance to examine why so many people had voted for them.
[3] In a democracy, people have the right to vote as they choose. If choices are limited, it is no longer a real democracy. Mainstream parties need to listen to people’s concerns and work hard to win their confidence.
[4] If extremist parties are banned, they will not disappear; they will become underground groups where they are likely to become more extreme in views, rhetoric and behaviour. A political party needs to remain respectable and within the law to be legitimate and so their existence has a moderating effect.
[5] It is difficult to decide which parties count as extreme, and dangerous to give anybody the power to do so. Clearly it is not the case that any party that wishes to curb immigration is extreme, and so where do we draw the line? In 2012, a local council in England removed foster children from a family because they were members of the UK Independence Party; UKIP believes that the UK should leave the European Union (EU) and is not considered by most to be an extremist party, so this highlights the potential problems.
Possible motions
This House would ban extremist political parties.
This House believes that the far right undermines democracy.
Related topics
Censorship by the state
Democracy