[UK] UKIP again banned from speaking at a students' union

Post Reply New Topic

So basically, on the back of a couple of complaints by left-wing students who don't like free speech, they've decided to ban a major political party from speaking to students.

This is one of many reasons why student unions deserve to be held in contempt. Fascist bigots.

Wow. I can't believe they can get away with that. If nothing else this douche bag student union should consider what kind of image they are presenting of their country to the rest the world. A real black mark on democracy.

Good for them.

It makes me anxious to think I would be around someone who would vote UKIP. As the child of an immigrant I find their attitudes at best troubling and at worse horrifying. Ditto their views on homosexuality (and I assume bisexuality), and the disabled, and people in receipt of social services. Anyway "Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas using one's body and property to anyone who is willing to receive them", the society aren't willing to receive them, end of.

Oh, and by the way - the student union censored UKIP because of their political beliefs and because of a few complaints. They may well not actually represent the students' views properly - some may be UKIP and others may be of all political persuasions may object to this censoring of a political voice.

I'm a UKIP member and activist. Ask away

For me, this is a question of free speech. You may not agree with leaving the EU (though the case for staying in is increasingly shaky) or to halt unlimited immigration from EU states and institute a controlled immigration policy (as we had historically), or our opposition to gay marriage (though the party supported and supports civil partnerships and I would be happy with gay marriage in another form), but I expect the candidates of other parties to argue back with us and for audience members to ask their questions. I do not expect the SU simply to shut down voices they don't like.

We have members with Polish citizenship stand for UKIP (and a "Friends of Poland in UKIP" group) and some branches have Romanian members.

Last edited by Tequila on 17 Mar 2014, 11:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

I think it's a shame people still connect anti immigration with racism, on both sides. It's possible to not be racist and still be against immigration and that's where things need to go.

There's nothing racist about anti immigration, or there doesn't have to be. There are negative aspects of immigration that have nothing to do with race and impact on all of us, children of immigrants included.

I mean, there has to be children of immigrants that are against immigration too right? Or there should be. They have as much to lose as any white person now that they're here and x amount of generations in.

I personally am against more immigration but I would never want the people that have grown up here and who I consider to be British to be thrown out of the country. For me British means going to our schools, watching our tv, taking on our attitudes, growing up in our culture.

My stance is more that I want the doors to be shut and then once the line in the sand is drawn we can say " everyone here already is British". And then community ties can be established. People can regain their sense of pride again. I'd just like to see the constant state of flux continual immigration puts our society in ended. Nothing can truly be done and things can never be settled until the day we're a couple of generations along and every non white face( apart from via marriage, immigration via marriage should never be stopped) in the country was born in this country and the true immigrants were a couple of generations back. Then the true British identity can start to re emerge in my opinion.

It will be good when the various people's living here, the children of immigrants, can start to feel comfortable being nationalist. It always struck me as wrong that parties like the bnp talk like they represent the British people when in fact the British people are a much bigger group than they claim to represent. When the British national party is representing British blacks, British Asians, and so on, that's when it'll become the bnp in truth.

I do hate the way the way the countries full of what I'd consider to be traitors with their attitudes right now in all honesty. I want people to be proud of their country but I want everyone here to be proud and not just whites. There is a kind of attitude that's rife right now where people hate this country. Everyone seems to hate it. I see immigration support as a form of self hatred and it's self destructive behaviour. There are immigrants here who actually hate this country too. To lots right now this country is just somewhere to live and no better than anywhere else. That attitude really needs to change.

I think it is important to remember that free speech is limited to public fora.

A private person, business or organization is perfectly free to ban speech to which it objects. Unless the Student Union has been elevated to a public body, or an arm of government, I think it is incorrect to assert that they can be made to respond to allegations of restricting free speech.

That being said, while their conduct might be legal, it's downright stupid.

UKIP isn't anti-immigration. That's the main point that needs to surface.

The BNP, BDP etc etc is anti-immigration. UKIP is not.

Also: it's quite possible to be for immigration and be a fundamentally racist human being.



I've met first generation immigrants who don't even have British citizenship that are against more immigration to the UK from their country of origin.



Multiculturalism and ghettoisation of identity and culture has a lot to do with this.



Yup, and neither does UKIP.



Many people without a British passport are more culturally British than some that were born here and have lived here all their lives.



We'll have to do that when we leave the EU anyway. We will have to offer citizenship to permanently settled Eastern European nationals.



Agree with pretty much everything you've said here, but the BNP is a white supremacist party. For those people that want to leave the EU and believe in civic nationalism, there is UKIP.

In the linked article it says:

"But the block on Ukip in the Midlands, first introduced in 2012, is because the party wants to repeal the Human Rights Act and repatriate powers from Brussels. "

I'm not familiar with "the powers of Brussels," but human rights seem like a good thing.

We want to leave the EU. We want Britain to be an independent, self-governing country once again with the Westminster parliament having full sovereignty.

What's being referred to is the Human Rights Act, which when it was set up had good, honourable intentions but now is notoriously abused to, for example, prevent criminal foreigners and terrorists from being deported.

Would Britain be able to survive on it's own?


If this refers to not sending people back to their countries to face torture then I disagree with you. I don't think it's right to put people in that position regardless of their nationality. Everyone's a person first.

UKIP is basically the US Republican Party with British accents. There are no major differences between the parties.

Yes, easily. We buy considerably more from the EU than they buy from us, and the EU economies are shrinking whilst the Commonwealth's is rising.



So you would want the taxpayer to be made to keep some very nasty foreign criminals in the country indefinitely because of a chance they may be tortured?

I think if you come to the UK, coming from a backward dungheap should be encouragement enough for you to stay within the law and keep your nose clean. It's the ultimate threat of the type that only serious offenders understand. We're not talking deporting someone for a parking ticket here.

There are quite a number of foreign criminals who should be deported but won't be because of 'family reasons'. Like the recent-ish case of Jamaican Keno Forbes (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -case.html). I can really imagine him being a family man.

The ECHR has also made us allow prisoners to have the vote, against the wishes of public opinion and our representatives here.

UKIP is way to the left of the U.S. Republican Party.

Apart from the sizeable base of supporters from a Labour background of course. And their desire to keep the NHS and social welfare.

There are a mixture of different opinions within UKIP but we're quite a liberal party.

I don't think they're different on the issues of climate change, gay marriage, or defense spending, to name the ones off the top of my head. Which means I think the union's ban is a bit nonsensical, since whatever is the equivalent of FOX News over there isn't getting censored probably.

I think UKIP isn't going to do well because of the "departure" of Godfrey Bloom. I think something's going to come to the surface that derails the party enough to stop their progress.

As far as I am concerned, these people are not our responsibility. They are not our citizens.

If you do it your way, there is no real punishment for foreigners behaving badly. We have to keep them here regardless.



Bloom was a liability. He is still a member of UKIP and he is supporting Jane Collins and Amjad Bashir get elected in Yorkshire.



UKIP is very non-interventionist when it comes to defence. The party's attitude is basically that we should strengthen our national defence capabilities, but otherwise keep out of foreign conflicts (unlike the U.S. Republicans). We want to get out of Afghanistan for example, and only be involved in defending our own territory.

The party supported civil partnerships when they were proposed.

As for warble gloaming - I find that the AGW types have kind of lost touch with reality. For me, the evidence is not there and neither is it for UKIP.