Freedom of speech, Holocaust denial & Neo-Nazism

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

Why shouldn’t the Oxford Union offer an invitation to Nick Griffin and David Irving when the topic being debated is freedom of speech?

The only argument being put forward is that these two men have vile political views, so therefore should be denied a platform at the Oxford Union. That would defeat the whole purpose of the talk. As Noam Chomsky said:       

“Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.”

Nick Griffin is a neo-Nazi, who doesn’t defend the freedom of speech of others, but it would be dishonest to pretend that his prosecution for racial incitement, which he was acquitted on, wasn’t politically motivated or an example of a fascist regime using anti vilification legisaltion to try and jail political opponents. For that reason alone he deserves to be invited.

And the case for the inviting Irving is even more obvious. David Irving is a historian, who has equally odious political views to Griffin, was jailed for historical heresy. He was literally imprisoned for a thought crime. His sentence was a deliberate attempt to stifle academic debate. Contrary to media reports Irving wasn’t jailed for denying the Holocaust, he was jailed for minimising the Holocaust. He refuses to accept that six million Jews died in the Nazis genocide. There is no academic consensus on the number that died, estimates range from over 1 million to under 8 million. If anything the mainstream views is that the figure is under six million.  The same law could have been used against the likes of Norman Finkelstein.   

It also absolute hypocrisy that the Zionist lobby and right wing media are leading the protest against this debate, when they were the most vociferous in denouncing Muslims as being Islamo-fascist when they protested against defamation of Islam. But when they are being even more censorious, it is anti fascist!   

The issue isn’t whether the Oxford Union agrees with their views – most people there don’t  - it is whether they have the right to air them without being criminalised.