Donate SIGN UP

Violence Is Corrupting Our Democracy

Avatar Image
Khandro | 13:52 Sat 24th Feb 2024 | News
18 Answers

'Fascism begins with political violence on the streets. In 1922, Benito Mussolini ordered his supporters to march on Rome and threaten to overthrow the democratic government. In the early 1930s gangs of Nazis and communists fought for control of Berlin’s streets. In 1999, a mysterious bombing campaign, that killed dozens of people and destroyed apartment blocks in Moscow and Volgodonsk, allowed Vladimir Putin to take power by posing as a strongman who could keep Russians safe.

The UK is experiencing its own version of fascistic violence. As befits the modesty of this country we have a quintessentially British version of it. Nothing too grand or showy is on display. Nevertheless, violence and the threat of violence is successfully perverting the course of democratic life.

In the chaos of yesterday’s attempt by parliament to pass a motion on the war in Gaza it became clear that MPs were not frightened of the party leaders and whips, but of Islamist terrorism and mobs at their homes and offices.' 

 Nick Cohen, The Spectator Australia

How concerned are you 



1 to 18 of 18rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

Not particularly, as there has to be a point coming soon when even the most blinkered of politicians realise there are problems they haven't been dealing with,  especially now they are the ones targeted, and decide to start solving them, and telling the police farce to stop messing about and start extracting their collective digits.

We had a lot of violence and attacks by the IRA.

Question Author

When it comes to 'useful idiots' AB seems to have more that its fair share. 😃

16:13 //When it comes to 'useful idiots' AB seems to have more that its fair share. 😃//

I've seen many more posts from useless ones.

Atheist, as an argument that is always an poorly thought-out one.  All you need to do is ask yourself what would it would take to appease the IRA and what it would take to appease Islamic extremists.  It doesn't take a lot of thought.

*a poorly

Question Author

//...ask yourself..// is for some a big ask.

The IRA were fighting for their country - on the world stage, a local territorial matter.  Islamism is an ideological, international movement, with ambitions to change the world to it's liking, and by heck, I think they're doing well at it when I see, 'From the Rivers to the Sea' hologrammed onto Big Ben itself & no action taken. 

KHANDRO, what law was broken by those protecting images onto the Elizabeth Tower?

Question Author

^^ I'll be generous and assume that post is out of innocent ignorance of what that phrase means.

What law was broken then?

The police said no laws were broken but surely permission is required to shine slogans onto public buildings?  Whose I don't know.  Maybe in this case Mr Khan's office -  in which case it would somewhat ironic.  Does anyone know?

Naomi, I don't know if permission is required to shine slogans onto public buildings. Would you like a law requiring such permission? I presume that granting or refusing permission would be based on possible harm to local amenity arising from bright lights. Or perhaps the content of the words used. Who would you like to be in charge of approving or refusing certain words? It all sounds a bit Big-Brotherly. I would have thought that existing laws against inciting hatred or violence would suffice. Do you think that we need new laws, tailored to specific situations as they arise - perhaps a 'Lee Law' or a 'Boris Law' or a 'Khan Law'?

Or a 'Naomi Law'?

THECORBYLOON, ignorance is bliss erm, you know what thye meant with that on big ben, yet it was allowed, thats incitement, can i out up a nazi symbol or an isis flag, after all it's only a flag.. that slogan on ben was deliberate and thought about, to me it says, we are here..and it's to late, your democracy is weak and flawed, ummah is the way and the light, the uk is weak, we are strong, and by your own laws we will prevail.

Khandro; Why are you referencing Australian newspaper articles?

Atheist, I too would have thought laws against inciting violence would suffice.  Unfortunately the police don't seem to agree.  

As for other comments in your post, this isn't about me - something I've reminded you of on other topics.

Sorry, Naomi.

Perhaps because the Australian media is less cowed by a woke attitude ?

1 to 18 of 18rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Violence Is Corrupting Our Democracy

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.