3 ms·
The people also chose the government doing the banning. I don’t find this reasoning holds any water. If we all vote to ban the party some dude started to advoc
by jmye 3y ago
The people also chose the government doing the banning. I don’t find this reasoning holds any water.
If we all vote to ban the party some dude started to advocate for killing all left-handed people, we’re not being anti-democratic - we’re being serious people. If you think this party poses no threat, then that’s a real argument. “But it’s not fair that I can’t vote for the cannibals/Nazis/anti-democracy advocates” is unequivocally not (and it’s not more so just because you don’t think they’re actually Nazis or whatever).
- gameman144 3y agoThere is a difference between allowing a party and allowing an act. If a party says "drugs should be legal", it doesn't mean that drug dealers are legal today. Outlawing an action is fine. Outlawing a party who says the action should be okay is anti-democratic.