Rob, Rambling - A lot of things interest me...

Man, I could sit here for hours and write about the BNP and its appearance on Question Time tonight, but it’s already 1am, and I’ve probably churned out over 2,000 words on the topic. When I get angry, the words flow

Much appreciated if you bothered to read my ramblings, especially if you disagreed. I’ve tried to put across a coherent train of thought, and I think there aren’t too many internal inconsistencies.

Oh, and for the Yanks, just remember what the dashboard looked like for non-Americans this time last year…

As a result of Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time, the girlfriend and I had a pretty heated debate about whether or not he should have even been allowed on the programme and given a platform on which to express his racist views to a national, prime-time audience.

She was firmly of the belief that he should never have been given the opportunity to even be on the programme, because he is racist, and because his political party is racist. She said that to be racist is a crime in the United Kingdom, which it isn’t*, but I can see where she is coming from.

I fully disagreed, saying that you have to give a political party a voice, no matter how much you disagree with it. In a modern, liberal, democratic society, the only way to defeat views is to prove them wrong through debate and reason; censorship is not the answer.

To provide a bit of context, the girlfriend grew up in 80s and 90s Zimbabwe, as a white person, and so has experienced racism against herself personally. This doesn’t mean that she is automatically prejudiced against non-whites (far from it, I couldn’t imagine a more inclusive person than her), but she knows how it is to see racism up close and personal.

I think this was her driving force behind stating that racists of the BNP ilk should be neither seen nor heard in mainstream political coverage, no matter how many actual votes they garner. To be racist, in her view, is to forgo such political niceties as equal coverage with normal parties, and in fact it is to forgo coverage altogether.

My view is that you cannot deny a voice to these people, no matter how foul we find their opinions, especially when nearly a million people have voted for them in the last round of elections. It doesn’t matter that they are racist, communist, fascist, liberal or illiberal, they must be allowed to be heard.

I said that we can defeat these opinions by proving their falsehood, whereas the girlfriend believes that by giving them a platform their message is going to be heard further and wider. I can understand that, but at the same time it is also clear that the BNP is able to defeat itself by its appearances on this kind of programme.

We don’t need to censor the BNP when it does a perfectly good job of hoisting itself by its own petard.

Both of us became pretty heated in voicing the opinions and reasons behind our viewpoints, and I think we both came out of it appreciating why the other felt the way they did. I really enjoy having political debates, but it takes some kind of extremity/extremist to get me thoroughly worked up and giving my opinions room to breathe.

• It’s a crime to incite violence based on race, and racial motives are an aggravating factor in any crime when it comes to sentencing, but to be racist or spout racist views is not a crime.

The girlfriend and I got back home just after the start of Question Time tonight, but sat on the sofa absolutely enraptured by the political theatre taking place. Nick Griffin of the BNP was digging himself ever deeper holes whenever he was actually allowed to speak, and I was impressed by the sheer venom of the audience whenever they were given an opportunity to directly address him.

It makes my heart sing to realise that the vast, vast majority of the British public is vehemently opposed to the racist, scaremongering and patently false policies which the BNP promotes, and can see through the paper-thin veneer over the inherent racism beneath.

Griffin managed to diminish whatever credibility he had prior to the programme by his sheer lack of ability to provide any backing whatsoever for his theories and policies. He failed completely in his attempt to convince the voting public that the BNP is a viable political party.

Of course the BNP has its supporters, just as the Communist and Monster Raving Loony parties do. This doesn’t make them right. I just hope that a few people who previously voted for the BNP will realise next May that they have been wrong and vote for someone whose policies are more in tune with the general public.

A couple of other opinions on the BNP’s performance on Question Time tonight:

• Good on the BBC for taking this on, I reckon. Griffin is, unfortunately, a “politician” (read: racist), and if we are to stick by our freedom of speech and expression that democracy holds so dear, then an opportunity to appear on Question Time is what Griffin should have. jessie-estella

• He is a class A prick but let the fucker speak. If we didn’t have to freedom to speak, we’d all be fucked. pensivebaboo

• When Nick Griffin comments on Jan Moir, Twitter might turn inside out. @jonswaine

• I really wish he’d learn a bit about early human migration before saying ‘indigenous’ Brits. @brilliantology

• I want to hurt Nick Griffin. @kapi

• Definition of mixed feelings: The Mail is attacked for telling lies. By Nick Griffin. @badjournalism

• Watching Caddyshack. @kapi

To be fair to Nick Griffin, in the ten minutes I’ve been watching he has taken an absolute hammering from the audience and other panel members without being allowed a response.

I genuinely want to hear what he has to say, because I expect that the content which will come out of his mouth will show him (and his party) to be the racist to that they truly are.

To deny the BNP its ability to speak is so much worse than letting them speak and trying to promote their ideals. If you look at any evidence whatsoever, their points are rendered false.

We don’t need to deny them the platform to state their opinions. We need to defeat them through reasoned arguments.