Should extremists be banned from public discussion platforms?



All you need to know about the world this 
week
SEE ALL ISSUES
EDITOR'S LETTER
The 'other'
NEWS FEATURE 1
Is President Trump on the brink of a new Watergate?
NEWS FEATURE 2
Playing with Greek fire
DIGEST AMERICAS
No Trump bump for Twitter’s profits
DIGEST EUROPE
Fed up with taking the flak, Brussels launches a revamp
DIGEST EUROPE
Martin Schulz’s bid to topple Merkel hits turbulence
DIGEST ASIA-PACIFIC
Did Kim Jong-un order his own half-brother’s assassination?
DIGEST ASIA-PACIFIC
Kim’s missiles pose a major foreign policy challenge for Trump
DIGEST AFRICA
Former Liberian warlord Charles Taylor phones allies from UK prison
DIGEST AFRICA
The resignation of a general shines further light on the atrocities in South Sudan
DIGEST AFRICA
Armyworms and drought threaten millions of people in southern and eastern Africa
DIGEST MIDDLE EAST
Siege, chemical weapons and misinformation: How Assad broke Aleppo
DIGEST MIDDLE EAST
Is the two-state solution dead and buried?
THE PICTURE
Basking in a purifying golden glow
GOOD NEWS
Testing for Ebola in 15 mins
Malaysian aid for Rohingyas arrives in Bangladesh
THE  INFOGRAPHIC
People in numbers
IN SCIENCE
De-extinction: Not such a mammoth task?
IN MEDICINE
Why are we so bad at remembering details?
IN TECHNOLOGY
A white dwarf star contains the building blocks for life
roadsandkingdoms.com
The Friendliest Border - Roads & Kingdoms
foreignpolicy.com
The Blackwater of Jihad
africanarguments.org
The Strong Breed: The rise and fall of Africa’s great literary leaders | African Arguments
DEBATE
POLITICS
Should extremists be banned from public discussion platforms? 3

Calls to no-platform controversial figures have come to the fore in recent years, as the world experiences a rising tide of populism, theocratisation, and alt-right movements. Though many claim that refusing to host extremist speakers jeopardises freedom of speech, some media outlets, university unions, and debating organisations stand by their bans, especially with regard to Islamists who are often tied to anti-Semitism.

Those in favour of no-platforming argue that inviting representatives of extreme religious or socio-political views only ends up giving them mainstream legitimacy. In the wake of far-right leader Marine Le Pen’s highly controversial Remembrance Day appearance on the Andrew Marr Show in the UK, or the WikiLeaks revelations that the US Democratic Party sought to promote extremist Republican figures on the mistaken assumption they’d discredit themselves, there is a growing correlation between influential airtime and the rise once-fringe currents that have proven detrimental to harmonious communal relations - as shown by the spike in hate crimes. But the risk of no-platforming for liberals is that the banned figures gain traction and sympathy as “victims” or “outsider” figures, whose messages of truth are being censored by the establishment. Should opinions from every degree of the political spectrum be given equal and free airing? Are some views just too extreme? And how should democratic systems aspiring to political balance manage fringe entities?

read more
Share Opinion
LATEST
LEADING
L
Add bio
contributions - pts
Submit
A journalistic initiative Sponsored by:
american-express-sponsor
About this
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.
If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website.
OK