Finnish neo-Nazi group forced to disband: my thoughts
This will probably be a lot shorter than than my other post but I just feel I have to give my two cents on this. Yesterday, 30th of November, the Pirkanmaa District Court gave a decision that the neo-Nazi group Nordic Resistance Movement and all organizations related to them have to shut down their operations in Finland. This decision comes after major backlash against the group after one of it's members assaulted a counter protester last year. This is not the only time this group has resulted to violence, but it was the straw that broke the camels back. Still, I'm not sure if this was the right decision.
Let's look at the groups history. Nordic Resistance Movement originally started as a collective of regional neo-Nazi groups operating in Nordic countries. In 2016, they announced that the regional groups have disbanded and instead they are now all operating under the banner of Nordic Resistance Movement. Now, I don't now about the situation in other countries that well, but the Finnish branch has been connected to multiple violent attacks against their opponents, however, the most notable case was the assault at Asema-aukio in Helsinki.
In that case, the group was organizing a demonstration in Helsinki, when a passerby spat at the ground in front of the demonstrators and said something negative about the group. After this one of the demonstrators by the name of Jesse Torniainen, who had a history of violent crime, ran towards him and kicked him in the chest. Because of this the victim fell to the ground and hit his head, causing brain hemorrhage. He died a week later, however, no link between the kick and his death was found. Torniainen was given a two year sentence for aggravated assault, while charges for involuntary manslaughter were dismissed as no link between the victims death and the kick was found. This is because the victim had left the hospital against the doctors advice, which was seen as a reason for his death. The prosecutor in now appealing the case, trying to get a longer sentence. Now, this is not the only one case where the members of the group used violence. In 2013 members of the group tried to get into a publishing event about a book on far right in Finland. After they were denied entry, they attacked three individuals, causing non-fatal injuries. One of the attackers was armed with a knife. Other high profile cases include a tear gas attack against Helsinki Pride-parade in 2010 and an assault against an organization secretary for the National Coalition. Apart from these cases, there are multiple cases of it's members attacking left wing politicians and activists as well as scuffles with security in different events. However, the Asema-aukio assault caused the most backlash, as it caused massive anti-racism protest in multiple cities in Finland and events held in memory of the victim in Sweden. Largely because of this authorities started the process of trying to ban the organization.
Now, as I said, I'm not really convinced that this is the right decision. As I said in the introduction to this blog, I'm pretty much a free speech absolutist, so I'm in principle against the idea of banning a group just because they say something horrific, and to be clear, the Nordic Resistance Movement definitely does that. There's also the problem that the ban for the organization really only applies to the use of it's name and symbolism. In other words, it's completely possible for its members to still meet in private and continue the spreading of their hideous agenda. Also, it's completely possible for them to form a new organizations, with the same people in charge, as there is no way to prevent it. If their current leadership decides to do this, another court process is needed to shut down their operations and even after this, they can just start another organization and the same process has to be done again. They can essentially keep doing this as long as they want. So what this decision really does is force their operations underground.
I understand that this opinion might cause some backlash but I'm simply being consistent here. If you really defend freedom of speech, you have to also defend the people you disagree with and oh boy, do I disagree with these people. The fact is that banning them doesn't really solve the underlying problem of racism. Actually, I think this might come to bite us in the long run. You're really only trying to silence the opposition which is never a good idea. The fact is that their ideas are incredibly horrific and most people are against them. I think that ultimately the better idea is to let them spew their hideous ideas and counter them with your own and simply show how ridiculous they sound. Let them cause their own demise. We have the moral high ground, so why not show it?
Let's look at the groups history. Nordic Resistance Movement originally started as a collective of regional neo-Nazi groups operating in Nordic countries. In 2016, they announced that the regional groups have disbanded and instead they are now all operating under the banner of Nordic Resistance Movement. Now, I don't now about the situation in other countries that well, but the Finnish branch has been connected to multiple violent attacks against their opponents, however, the most notable case was the assault at Asema-aukio in Helsinki.
In that case, the group was organizing a demonstration in Helsinki, when a passerby spat at the ground in front of the demonstrators and said something negative about the group. After this one of the demonstrators by the name of Jesse Torniainen, who had a history of violent crime, ran towards him and kicked him in the chest. Because of this the victim fell to the ground and hit his head, causing brain hemorrhage. He died a week later, however, no link between the kick and his death was found. Torniainen was given a two year sentence for aggravated assault, while charges for involuntary manslaughter were dismissed as no link between the victims death and the kick was found. This is because the victim had left the hospital against the doctors advice, which was seen as a reason for his death. The prosecutor in now appealing the case, trying to get a longer sentence. Now, this is not the only one case where the members of the group used violence. In 2013 members of the group tried to get into a publishing event about a book on far right in Finland. After they were denied entry, they attacked three individuals, causing non-fatal injuries. One of the attackers was armed with a knife. Other high profile cases include a tear gas attack against Helsinki Pride-parade in 2010 and an assault against an organization secretary for the National Coalition. Apart from these cases, there are multiple cases of it's members attacking left wing politicians and activists as well as scuffles with security in different events. However, the Asema-aukio assault caused the most backlash, as it caused massive anti-racism protest in multiple cities in Finland and events held in memory of the victim in Sweden. Largely because of this authorities started the process of trying to ban the organization.
I understand that this opinion might cause some backlash but I'm simply being consistent here. If you really defend freedom of speech, you have to also defend the people you disagree with and oh boy, do I disagree with these people. The fact is that banning them doesn't really solve the underlying problem of racism. Actually, I think this might come to bite us in the long run. You're really only trying to silence the opposition which is never a good idea. The fact is that their ideas are incredibly horrific and most people are against them. I think that ultimately the better idea is to let them spew their hideous ideas and counter them with your own and simply show how ridiculous they sound. Let them cause their own demise. We have the moral high ground, so why not show it?
Kommentit
Lähetä kommentti