The BNP (British National Party) is being taken to court by the Race Relations Board for having a racist membership policy. Apparently it has a whites only policy. There are probably many people thinking "Good. It's about time something was done about the BNP". But hold on, let's think about this.
Many years ago when I used to play in a darts team we had in our league an Irish club. Although people of any nationality were welcome there as guests, only those born in the Republic of Ireland could become members. Is there any real difference between that club's membership policy & that of the BNP apart from 1 being based on colour & the other on race (you cannot join because you're not white against you cannot join because you're not Irish)? Discrimination on both grounds is illegal in the UK so why do we despise 1 type of discrimination yet regard the other as perfectly acceptable?
Whilst I think the BNP is an abhorrent organisation with only thinly-veiled racist policies, this action raises an interesting legal issue. Should the action succeed, what would be the impact on organisations such as the Black Police Officers' Association, the Muslim Council of Great Britain, or any other organisation that represents an ethnic group?
I always get in a mental knot when I ponder such ethical questions. I think organisations like the BNP should be banned, but I also believe in free speech. I also see no problem with groups that represent minorities or that restrict their membership to members of minority groups. So, how can you apply any kind of sanction against the likes of the BNP without putting those minority groups' organisations at risk also?
If this action by the Race Relations Board is allowed to proceed it could open up a really nasty can of worms. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see the BNP retaliate by taking legal action against minorities' groups on the same grounds.
I would be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this issue.
Many years ago when I used to play in a darts team we had in our league an Irish club. Although people of any nationality were welcome there as guests, only those born in the Republic of Ireland could become members. Is there any real difference between that club's membership policy & that of the BNP apart from 1 being based on colour & the other on race (you cannot join because you're not white against you cannot join because you're not Irish)? Discrimination on both grounds is illegal in the UK so why do we despise 1 type of discrimination yet regard the other as perfectly acceptable?
Whilst I think the BNP is an abhorrent organisation with only thinly-veiled racist policies, this action raises an interesting legal issue. Should the action succeed, what would be the impact on organisations such as the Black Police Officers' Association, the Muslim Council of Great Britain, or any other organisation that represents an ethnic group?
I always get in a mental knot when I ponder such ethical questions. I think organisations like the BNP should be banned, but I also believe in free speech. I also see no problem with groups that represent minorities or that restrict their membership to members of minority groups. So, how can you apply any kind of sanction against the likes of the BNP without putting those minority groups' organisations at risk also?
If this action by the Race Relations Board is allowed to proceed it could open up a really nasty can of worms. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see the BNP retaliate by taking legal action against minorities' groups on the same grounds.
I would be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this issue.
