Harry Deacon | We Should NOT Support No Platforming (2/8) | Oxford Union

The speaker in this video is a competitive debater, and therefore the views expressed may not necessarily represent their beliefs.
SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► is.gd/OxfordUnion
Oxford Union on Facebook: / theoxfordunion
Oxford Union on Twitter: @OxfordUnion
Website: www.oxford-union.org/
The Motion: This House Supports No Platforming.
ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Oxford Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. Since 1823, the Union has been promoting debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.

[@OxfordUnion]

Watch the full debate here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pJ6conmgpq9ql9U

[@posterlion]

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” ― George Orwell, 1984

[@whitedevil4122]

"Stop this crazy thing" - George Jetson, 1962

[@dostthouevenlogicbrethren1739]

@@whitedevil4122 sorry....there's no stopping the crazy of today...

[@Vaginaninja]

@@whitedevil4122 I hope you've managed to learn how to be funny since making this lame af comment

[@robertoseveno]

Great quote

[@NIK2181]

People who agree with no platforming need to be kept away from any powerful position in society!

[@sqr2024]

trf12567 Jordan Peterson is a social rapper who needs to be listened to. He is no where far right or far left. He is one of the few speakers with common sense.

[@annathequeen6333]

@Nikki O’brien Only losers that can’t win in a debate would deplatforming free speech! They are the ones that should be kept out of the society! It goes without saying!

[@jmakes3745]

People who agree with no platforming should be no- platformed from positions of power - because that’s not hypocritical at all.

[@NIK2181]

@@jmakes3745 Why would you want people who want to stop free speech in power? If they are so weak they can't tolerate differing opinions then they aren't fit for holding any sort of power.

[@jmakes3745]

@@NIK2181 Because they might possess many other qualities that makes them - in my opinion - suitable for office, although this being said my point wasn't about what makes somebody electable, it was that its entirely hypocritical to punish somebody for no-platforming by no-platforming.

[@mostlypeacefulrowan8747]

He is right that no-platforming assumes that I cannot handle a controversial idea. NZ's chief censor claims the censoring of the document written by the Christchurch shooter was "not for you". Its very snobbish and its insulting my intelligence

[@jmakes3745]

Not really, it just assumes that some people cannot handle an idea due to their unique set of experiences and characteristics and censors on the basis of that denominator.

[@tomservo75]

@@jmakes3745 So if 5% of a society is too sensitive to hear something, the solution is not to warn that 5% not to listen, but to prevent the 95% who CAN handle it??

[@melissajones5985]

Harry Deacon, what a wonderful presentation! I shall follow your career.

[@melissajones5985]

@Joshua McGillivray Absolutely. You're correct Joshua, that is in the description.

[@hebamadi265]

Thank God for sensible people on the planet

[@Ochtone]

Those who agree with no platforming ought to exercise the power with themselves first.

[@pathacker4963]

I guess they've never discovered the block option on many platforms. They've never had to listen to anyone they didn't want to hear, but no they want to control what I might like to hear.

[@johnc4774]

Ireland is proud of you young Deacon.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Proud? Proud of what exactly? Didnt Phoblacht once say that Ireland is proud of Gerry Adams? I suppose this Irish pride has tradition. Because he defends free speech on the grounds that it gives you the opportunity to ridicule and mock? Is that what Ireland is proud of? That is the point he is making, after all. I didn't know he was Irish. Makes sense though. There is something of the Inquisitor 's logic in his vicious argument that heretics like Nick Griffin should be allowed to speak to condemn themselves out of their own mouths. They are of course condemend as heretics in advance. Nobody will listen to them to hear what their arguments are. After all, he must know that Nick Griffin was put on Question Time with hardly a chance to be heard above the howling and boos and with the entire panel united against him. So what Paddy's pride is saying is "Instead of just confining heretics to a dungeon put them on show, give them no proper chance to argue their case, show them up to everyone as the despicable heretics they are. "That is the meaning of Deacon's nasty, insinuating and mean spitied I would say cowardly speech. To pout it bluntly, Paddy's pride is a shyster.

[@undefinedfreedom8580]

What an insightful and compassionate speech.

[@Maehedrose]

A solid speaker with some very valid points. I don't look forward to watching the next 'pro' speaker but it'd be pretty hypocritical not to listen to both sides of this debate.

[@grumpywasp4533]

Maehedrose exactly how I feel. It’s tough to listen to but well worth the intellectual exercise!

[@graham24616901]

It is meet that we should hear, debate and either refute or agree.

[@samrobinson5761]

Jesus Christ he's good. Best 12 minutes of Oxford Union I've watched; respect to you Harry Deacon!

[@MrYorickJenkins]

I disliked him intensely. Bigoted through and through Bigoted liberalism exists you know and he is an unpleasant practitionerof the art of liberal bigotry. Appears sweet and reasonable but if you listen with attantion you realise that the difference between him and no platfromers is that they are more honest. He too does not believe in meaningful debate when "extremists" are concerned. He is convinced that students are so biased to the poltiically correct veiw before debate begins that nobody need fear that they will be swayed by argument. Hwoever, the whole idea of a debate like this is precisely that people can be swayed by an argument not that as a highly intelligent Oxford student (as such I am sure he considers himself ethically and intellectually superior to lesser mortals) remain impervious to "nasty" views.

[@Mike-yj5yw]

If you think this speech is good u should listen to Katie Hopkins & Ann Widdecombs speeches.

[@rpmontero]

Im amazed of how civilized British debates can be. You should fight to keep that culture alive

[@phanders6236]

2:11 "that no platforming implicitly assumes audiences can not be trusted to exercise judgement" love that quote. And it's so true. I hate that kind of "we know whats best for you, your ears can not handle these dangerous views, pat on the head" kind of mentality.

[@hebamadi265]

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👍🏻

[@JACKMILLER200738]

A bold argument backed by reason and not patronizing the audience as less informed.

[@louisefox4852]

Brilliant speech Mr Deacon - thank you! You are an asset to our world.

[@Rizzberry89]

Well crafted and well delivered speech 👏

[@hipocampelofantocame]

No platforming is the millennial's ideal of going to hell their own way.

[@kbeetles]

Witty, to the point and persuasive! Many more young people like this young man - was a pleasure to listen to him!

[@f3aok]

Amazes me that the idea of limiting free speech is even being discussed.😱 does anyone know the result.

[@Ochtone]

Rather quaintly, to actively stop the discussion regarding limiting free speech, on whatever premise, would be to limit free speech.

[@f3aok]

@@Ochtone I'm not saying don't discuss it just can't understand anyone arguing for the restriction on freedom of speech.

[@snowyowel7961]

Shut up lol 😁 only kidding 🤗

[@Danielnikoula]

Excellent speech Harry!

[@forza223bowe5]

Quite scary if people don’t want free speech. Free speech is massively important on so many levels

[@socalbeeguy8041]

I move that all in favor of de-platforming be de-platformed; we must allow all to receive what they wish for.

[@hansdampf640]

your comment is the essence of division,the outcome would be civil war,at least.

[@hariseldon3786]

This whole debate could have been finished in one flourish - "All those who disagree with free speech are No-Platformed" point proven.

[@Rob-fx2dw]

In this chanber those who speak aginst platforming do it from a platform they have for themselves. How ironic and how hypocritical.

[@Hertfordshire247]

Is there a reason it takes so long from filming to uploading these? Why not broadcast live?

[@theohuioiesin6519]

Hertfordshire247 same here. Probably being registered with the CIA and the MI5 for being interested in free speech 😉 hence the lagging...

[@dimitriosglous4156]

Intelligent, witty and rebellious

[@HariKrishnan-ec5mn]

Spectacular! Well articulated 😊

[@Jakri1]

one of the best speeches i ever seen , good job

[@daviepadilla]

de-platforming basically means the might equals right..... I wonder who'd win that fight?

[@nothingbutthetruth2145]

Well said Lad

[@rickstophervonwtf4108]

Absolutely brilliant!!

[@sedwarg]

No platforming boils down to mob rule. Not ideal. Brilliant speech.

[@JohnThomas-yo1no]

Well said, sir. Well said.

[@HelloEveryonez678]

I'm getting an idea on how Celeste got into Oxford!

[@victorgomes7585]

Superb speech.

[@ashb2483]

Well done, brother

[@golpherguy6388]

Much better then Mr. Solomon

[@AnnalyFaith]

Powerful!

[@paddyhickey2211]

Harry deacon got 8 H1’s in his leaving cert. that’s the equivalent of 4 A*s . An average of 7 students achieve this mark throughout the whole country. This boy is smart

[@garyc3233]

but i think sure he wrong on the homophobe statement...and ones that say it...for all time...he may be pretty good on other things...but heh... was his degree a ''fake oxford product''?? hah..joke on your intro name

[@janjensen1500]

Thank you.

[@lebenergy247]

your right to speak IS the point!! social media problem is different from the TRUE FREE SPEECH issue

[@y1521t21b5]

The joy of knowing a debate is won before you even speak... ;-)

[@TheGreatWhiteNorthEx]

Awesome!

[@MyrkDomolith]

Low blows. Jeez... Celeste's seemed like friendly ribbing. That aside, sound points and explanations. What sounded like moral arguments were backed up by effective examples.

[@sihartobing9570]

This Cute Oxford University Debat, ...Way To Promo The Campus Is But Not Change Anything, .... God Bless All, ...... Cherrio.🌠👍🌠🎼🎤🎼🌠👍👍👍🌠.

[@posterlion]

On de-platforming: “Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.” ― George Orwell, 1984

[@lartus8027]

Good speech

[@ayreonfreak]

Very good speech

[@clockywork]

What do the bell 'dings' signify?

[@KawaiiStars]

i think timing

[@NhwNews]

Those who believe in 'No Platforming' should be no platformed so they could practice what they preach.

[@josuaniu9219]

No platform means only one view what if architects only drew a house plan from one angle ?

[@rounsterbout]

ALL i can say if you do not want no platforming you might as well close oxford down and build houses >>then again i think its a waste of space i would knock it down and build houses for them immigrants they all want in

[@zoeblake6740]

How did he put katie hopkins in a category with Malcolm X?

[@jonas6120]

Malcolm X was very controversial at his time, as is Katie Hopkins now. I think that was his point

[@ozzie-sk9dh]

Why is social media dominating the no platforming debate. Is that the only measure for your argument? It disenfranchises a huge percentage of society. The debate is not just on social media. The vast majority who have a stake in this argument couldn't care less about the view express on social media. Its cheap and worthless.

[@MARTINA-gc3tq]

"NOT SUPPORT".....should not apparently intellectually people have worded the motion "OPPOSE" and thus avoid an awkward double negative.

[@madisonmccoll2949]

what is harry deacon's twitter i cant find it and i NEED IT

[@sihartobing9570]

Platform For The People Life In UK Country Is UK Country Law Rule, .... God Bless All, ..... Cherrio.👍👍👍🌠.

[@laurentivoli1183]

RT being banned from a conference on freedom of press, being the most ironic of all.

[@mouselim72]

So, did the proposition or opposition won? It's a debate right?

[@BJoinedBReality]

The Democrats thought it was offensive when the Republicans argued that slavery was immoral...

[@williamoverton7775]

We do not know that homophobia bigotry antisemitism or anything is not correct unless it's strongest advocates have a platform. Likewise we learned this by giving the critics a platform

[@romanempire8705]

2:35 what a roast XD

[@Someone-cr8cj]

Best thumbnail

[@dannyouellet2429]

Solid speech, the only thing i disagree is that Marine Le Pen is not a fascist ! The media and politic portrait her as a fascist to demonise her. But your free to think what you want of her :)

[@truthmatters-jt5up]

US universities exist as marketplaces of ideas? not in a VERY long time, and they freely exercise outright censorship.

[@dafyddlloyd868]

this young boy thinks...unless he quickly stops doing so, he will go nowhere.

[@robinthrush9672]

I may not agree with how he expressed his reasoning, but I think it was effective for an audience of younger people by pointing out that it is expanding into proponents for their own beliefs and not just people that they disagree with.

[@hariseldon3786]

He could have taken more square aim at the second speaker Robert French, as Chancellor of the University of Western Australia - one of 7 Universities deemed the least open to free speech in Australia; recently under investigation by royal commission in regards to freedom of speech in Australian universities... But he feels fine about speaking all things wise about what he thinks...

[@helenrogers1400]

Noble Tarkan , They are full of their own importance - or what they believe is their importance!👎👎

[@sihartobing9570]

The Reason Have Platform This Still Gray Word'' ... Can Trap Anyone Inocent People, .... Thanks, .... Cherrio.👍👍👍🌠.

[@KenNickels]

Does anyone see the irony of using words to disallow words? Doesn't that diffuse the so called platforming argument before any single word is spoken? Isn't the platforming word itself a pathetic overture by underachievers (in the English language) to give their impotence some weight?

[@Bizzaro500]

I can't even listen to the other side of this argument. But I live in a country where I believe you have the right to say it and I will support that right for you to say it, until you tell me my rights to say it cannot be heard. Then I will exercise my 2nd Amendment Right to defend my 1st Amendment Rights and in doing so, I'm also protecting your 1st Amendment Rights.

[@johnatkinson7479]

Please tell me NOT won

[@jonas6120]

They did

[@TheWookiedan]

What was the neck bruises comment about

[@ritafernandes7218]

Do we, in the West, advocate the burning of books? No, we don’t , we see this as a travesty as there is value in all books! Whether we agree with the axioms being put forward by the author, or not, the book has a right to exist and offers insights into views which could potentially be completely at odds with our own. De-platforming is the equivalent of book burning...

[@williamcarter3955]

Im consistently surprised at the amount of time wasted on ad hominem attacks in the OxfordUnion debates. Are they seriously considered good form amongst debating/dialectic societies? Or is it just a symptom of debating naturally attracting strong egos?

[@indigenous5210]

Disect the reasoning for the ignorant

[@truthmatters-jt5up]

a world that is becoming increasingly right wing and xenophobic? where -- on Earth 2? Bizarro World? it is the right that is censored, canceled, ridiculed an vilified. it is the right that is de-platforned. there are several points where he is off 180 degrees. what is he even talking about?

[@smartymarty2351]

1:45 - I'm confused... UK government told colleges not to "No platform"... but haven't they arrested people for Twitter quotes? This guy killed it.

[@johnwhite9461]

I will give Harry credit for at least introducing the concept of UNLAWFUL speech, but he didn't understand it. Its not enough to say "that speech MIGHT be unlawful" (call for harm and loss IE Violence etc) "so it must not be allowed": that creates the tyranny of cowardice. Speech must occur and the speaker must commit the offence BEFORE it can be unlawful: then the law can throw the book at the speaker. It is woeful how poorly understood today that free speech has never been an unlimited right without consequence. Its courage spines and confidence that is required to maintain and safeguard free society, not supine submissions to the whinges of the mob: or any government could ban opposition on the basis it might upset someone and democracy is done.

[@nuria6358]

where did you learn this? any book recomendations?

[@jaewok5G]

two Irish leads … is this some kind of affirmative action diversity?

[@theohuioiesin6519]

jim ewok 😂

[@cpl8857]

Why don't you go colonise the conversation somewhere else?

[@jaewok5G]

@@cpl8857 poking self-righteous pompous windbag wannabes is more fun than humans should be allowed.

[@kainreaver6510]

His argument fell into the trap of attempting to appeal to those attempting to censor via the 'sunlight is the best disinfectant' line of thinking, which essentially says that horrible views need to be heard so those people can be bullied and shamed into thinking 'correctly'. The better free speech argument relies on the importance of developing your own beliefs, critical thinking, etc.

[@eliomiro7855]

people should be more like hopkins. This is so boring.

[@TheWolverine1984]

The President is hot.

[@Mynsinger]

Is Harry Irish? His accent is Irish but with the upper English lilt

[@hezbollah670]

"Ridicule"... so an opposing point of view is to be challenged and ridiculed ? What about respecting and accepting that which may be ridiculous, If we have the ability to exercise the right to have any kind of view or behaviour, should we be ridiculed, is ridicule going to infringe on a humans right to be whatever they choose? I think so. A pizza is not a Yorkshire pudding, should one ridicule another for differences? Morris dancers do not advance the DNA of our present Yorkshireman, they look and behave ridiculous when you're not from "up North", should they be challenged ? Should a Muslim or a Hindu be challenged? Is a blue god with many arms and an elephant trunk ridiculous? should we challenge these things and outlaw them? Oxford is a political theatre, we have but 90 years to live and we involve ourselves in such low-level wankery. Tuition fees, what a waste.

[@tonyaughney8945]

To know who controls you, you just need to notice who you can't criticise.

[@benchapple1583]

'No platforming may be illegal under freedom of speech law!' HMG. You have got to be fucking joking. What the hell are hate crime laws. Why do we have political prisoners.

[@GLOKD]

A platform is a thoroughfare to cultural power. No platforming, then, is an entirely rational expression of cultural dominance. It's an effective way of bolstering people who think like you, and shaming those who don't. The idea that "sunlight is the best disinfectant", or that "censorship drives bad people to more violent means", and other Liberal arguments from utility, are naive: controversial speakers almost always benefit from platform access, and stand to gain the most. Banning them is very easy and very effective. Whilst rational, and effective, no platforming also conveys intellectual fragility - hence the Pro-side often relying upon the supremacy of "expert" opinion and received wisdom. Currently the Right stands to gain the most from platform equality because rightwing views are generally seen as nefarious or wrong-headed, especially in education. Conversely, the Left has relied too much on censorship, the abuse of its institutional power and arguments from authority/consensus. The most important thing about platform equality is that CONSENSUS opinion - even the most established, most moral, most effective - can be challenged. Because even relatively benign beliefs with political and institutional protection can become sour, flabby and tyrannical. Look how the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th century has morphed into vicious, racial, identity politics and grievance mongering today. This is because anybody who deigned to challenge anti-racist thinkers were deemed beyond the pale and duly de-platformed (Charles Murray, et al.)

[@drlca6601]

Where does censoring stop? Where does it begin? Who decides what is moral and good in regards to the words we use when we talk to one another? Who decides who decides? Oppression begins with suppression.

[@leehardy367]

what no yorkshiremen ah well we will put up wi the crap at least w have katie

[@sayamieestuff710]

Hope not hate antifa 😂😂😂

[@znumoxlae-7826]

What’s with that distracting bell 🛎⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️

[@ifonlyicouldstop]

At ca. 8:00 he makes a point I've heard Sargon repeatedly make regarding the platforming of Nick Griffin.

[@dirtyharold7164]

@@ikhtiarhossain lol, sargon is about as far right as the baby toe on my left foot.

[@ifonlyicouldstop]

@@ikhtiarhossain and I think you have a tenuous grasp on the English language. You seem to particularly struggle with words like "Far" and "Right".

[@nighthawks764]

Shadow Hokage if UKIP is far right then Labour before Blair was also far right

[@ifonlyicouldstop]

@@ikhtiarhossain even if I accept your contention that UKIP are "Basically far-right", which I don't, parties contain a broad church. For instance labour contains within its party,; outright anti-semites and anti-racist activists; billionaire industrialists and union shop stuarts; social liberals and outright marxists. What makes you think that UKIP is some kind of monoculture.

[@aspergianheteroclite3014]

“If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.” - Noam Chomsky

[@garyc3233]

and noam is one that should have been shutoff for sure...not bc of no platforming...and thats a copy statement from others...but all i saw of noam is that he went against usa all the time...the antipopularity thing..

[@D4n1t0o]

Jesus. That lassy president is a right sort, ain't she?

[@dirtyharold7164]

An English Rose.

[@crazyfishmonster459]

Terrible posture is a signal to a lazy upbringing and a generally poor outlook at life. It's a disgrace to slouch in the Chairman's chair. Good genetics, probably, just let down by the environment.

[@deckofcards87]

@@crazyfishmonster459 Yes, but she is Female so there's her default stature, 'cos you know... oppression.

[@allahspreadshate6486]

Oh, yes.

[@mrlawilliamsukwarmachine4904]

He was doing good until he said ‘homophobes’

[@biospiritofthewest5961]

He is arguing a side he does not 100% agree with...sad.