´óÏó´«Ã½

The NSPA, a derivative of the American Nazi Party, was given permission to march and demonstrate in Chicago, but there was never outside official sanction. Institutions that choose to give the pulpit to these con men do a disservice to themselves, as well as the public, and in doing so lose a large degree of their credibility.

I think we all as human we need not to have diffrent way of calling one and other black or white .
If God did not want us to be together we should have been under one umbreller or planet earth.

Racism is a deplorable and horrible offense against all humankind and those who feel hatred for others solely on the basis of the colour of their skin or their ethnic origins should always be held accountable for their deeds.
However, we cannot allow the limiting of freedom of speech for some simply because we do not like what they say. How many times has a despotical government or ruler tried and executed people merely because of what they said?
As Pastor Martin Niemöller: "First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."
If we limit freedom of speech for others we do not like, then how can we protest when, finally in power, they limit it for us?

everybody ought to be given their platform and there is nothing more individual or unique than a persons perspective. whether we agree or not is also a personal decision which will ultimately manifest itself in our agreement or disagreement with the subject matter.

what i disagree with is the incitement of others in a point of view or 'storm of protest.' if you feel strongly about something, and if you wish to protest it, that is fine, but i think you will find that most normal people will simply ignore subject matter of a distasteful nature, negating the need for moral outrage [often spurred on by mass media].

personally i dont see the need to mix with other cultures and races. interact and appreciate; yes, but mix and integrate; no.

you will find many many examples in nature of creatures with similar genomes and from similar families which do interact but ultimately retain their own identity, and where lines are blurred, conflict and problems occur.

in mans arrogance we neglect to learn lessons from nature, believing we are separate from it. ideologies, religions and righteousness have replaced what may have been called instinct.

each race & culture has/had its place and purpose and our exponential population expansion has probably sealed our fate.

Can we please learn from history? With regards to the huge economic and political restructuring that Pres. Obama is attempting at this trying time, all you have to do is look at FDR and his administration, responding to the Great Depression. Huge federal spending, many new federal institutions and government programs....with huge results. There were many critics, and a negative response from various political camps, and sectors of American society. The results were, however, mostly positive, with a major reform of our national government and the public's appreciation of those lasting programs and benefits.

Separate from the entire argument about racism here, we do have to appreciate what the current administration is doing, what past administrations did under somewhat similar circumstances, the fact that there was resistance and criticism of such massive change from certain sectors, yet most everyone was happy with the lasting impacts of such momentous government spending and restructuring of the American economy, and even politics and society.

Please offer this perspective on the program. Thank you.

No, we should not give racists a platform since...they will spew their awful words....

=Dennis Junior=

In public institutions I would say there is no room for racist events because according to the basic democratic system it is the aim of such parties to abolish it with their ideology. As long as they stay in their own rooms to discuss their things, it´s more than enough. Anyway, such organisations are watched by the constitutional protection in Germany ans there is a report about that. In extreme cases, such parties are forbideen officially. This has been the case for two times in Germany, in the 1950 a post Nazi party and then a communist party.
It is important to discuss the basic attitudes of these parties in a public debate, but I would not invite such persons in TV shows.
I know an example from a former TV speaker in a TV show in Germany, she talked about her ne book and admitted that th "Nazi family politics has been actually good." There was a huge scandal because the moderator told her to leave his show at once! A dramatic end of this show!
It just like you mentioned, the public will certainly not accept such displays of anti-democracy. This is simply a public provocation and disturbs the public.

Therefore it is an silent agreement not to invite such people in TV shows - or even to give them a platform for racist ideas - in order to prevent public damage of a larger scale.

Yes we should if only to understand the nature of their hatred towards others or their partiality. Then we could strive to make the world a better place right? There may have been instances in history where tribes of people with different strengths and abilities could live harmoniously together without having to utter so much as a grunt and pointing a finger in the right direction (body language). However in this age where verbal language is born, we may need to hear the opinions of others in order to comprehend their motives and hopefully form a more cohesive society.