Coalition roars with 18c triumph as nation yawns

At The Australian:

Malcolm Turnbull has presented his government’s proposed changes to the wording of Australia’s racial vilification laws – and the administration of race-hate claims by the Human Rights Commission – as a defence of free speech.

The Prime Minister said the government was “defending the law by making it clearer” and better protecting Australians by ensuring that mere “slights” and the “taking of offence” no longer triggered section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

“We are defending Australians from racial vilification by replacing language which has been discredited,” he said. “We are also amending the law so as to ensure that the Human Rights Commission will offer procedural fairness.”

“We need to restore confidence to the Racial Discrimination Act and to the Human Rights Commission’s administration of it.”

Mr Turnbull acknowledged there would be “many critics and opponents” of the move. But he argued the government’s position went to “an issue of values.”

“Free speech is a value at the very core of our party,” he said. “It should be at the core of every party.”

Then how come Alan Joyce is forced to defend himself today against Pansy Pete who is still trying shut down marriage equality debate:

Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce says he will not be silenced over his support for gay marriage and companies and business leaders had an important role to play in debates on social issues.

Mr Joyce, who was singled out by Immigration Minister Peter Dutton, for calling on the federal government to legislate for gay marriage, said Qantas had the right to speak up on social issues in the same way it does on economic policy.

“Qantas (and its CEO) is often called on to speak publicly on issues like company tax, industrial relations and trade. And we do.

“Because these are important issues that ultimately shape what kind of society we live in (which is the point of economics, right?),” Mr Joyce said in an article published on LinkedIn on Tuesday.

“We’re pleased to add marriage equality to that list.”

Culture wars, man, yawn.

Comments

  1. CornflakesMEMBER

    Team Xenophon is not backing the 18C changes, ergo it won’t pass the senate, and so it is just another mill stone the government will carry around.

    • But Mal will make the hard right happy in the process.
      Idk… maybe a deal got done behind the scenes, Mal progresses changes to 18c and he gets something he wants.
      To keep his job maybe?

      • CornflakesMEMBER

        Any deal is not worth the paper it is written on.
        He is safe until someone else looks better.

      • bolstroodMEMBER

        It is just a distraction.
        With all the problems facing this country,this is the most important???????????????????


  2. But he argued the government’s position went to “an issue of values.”

    There we go – the biggest proponents of ‘values politics’, the LNP. Golf clap.


    Culture wars, man, yawn.

    Sometimes I get the feeling that half of, especially LNP, sitting members got into politics to fight their own private culture wars, and this business of running a nation is damned nuisance stopping that important work.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      More likley an unspoken “Known” that “Culture waring” is the best way to keep the plebs the fuck out of the way of their neoliberal agenda.

      I have Catholic and evangelical inlaws and all this moral panic shit rolled out by conservatives resonates big time with millions of Australians.
      Fucking stooges the lot of them.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      More likley an unspoken “Known” that “Culture waring” is the best way to keep the plebs the fuck out of the way of their neoliberal agenda.

      I have Catholic and evangelical inlaws and all this moral panic shit rolled out by conservatives resonates with millions of Australia.
      Fucking stooges the lot of them.

      • adelaide_economistMEMBER

        I am assuming but it’s a fair assumption that Federal Ministers get a membership. They can throw plenty of business Qantas’ way (the key decider) with travel policies and obviously business people like to lobby Ministers. I’ve worked with people much lower down the chain who were CL members because the organisation they headed was small but did a fair bit of flying.

      • CornflakesMEMBER

        It was always the office assistants who did the flight bookings during my time in the public service. They are the ones who should be being given the treats by the airlines.

  3. AUS has swapped sneering at non-whites for sneering at whites. Both are wrong of course.

    I also used to think the solution to the sneering at non-whites is to import more non-whites into AUS. But infrastructure is bursting at the seams and as Mike kept saying, the immigrants that we get now are straight from the slums – exam cheats, visa frauds, even going as far as bribing AUS immigration officials.

  4. All they need to do is piss off the punitive damages nonsense.

    If socialists want to adopt the worst aspects of capitalism then USA is this way —–>

  5. The Coalition wishes everyone a happy Harmony Day

    ╱╱┏╮
    ╱╱┃┃
    ▉━╯┗━╮
    ▉┈┈┈┈┃
    ▉╮┈┈┈┃
    ╱╰━━━╯

  6. “Then how come Alan Joyce is forced to defend himself today against Pansy Pete who is still trying shut down marriage equality”

    I agree that is what Mr Potato head is trying to do. But its fair game either way isnt it. They are both big boys that can look after themselves. They are both entitled to abuse each other surely.

  7. Still, should be a great edition of the Rupertarian tomorrow, with bumper coverage of this red-letter day.
    It’s been a good week for them, what with their shock exclusive ‘New Trade Union Leader Supports Union Movement’ and the weekends coverage of what will surely become an Australian public holiday from next year on-‘Saint Bill’s Day’.

  8. I don’t recall changes to 18C being taken to an election by the LNP.

    So if they can break that promise surely they can break the “no SSM without a plebiscite” promise.

  9. Yeah! Abuse of individuals by stacked government bodies is fine. Impoverishment of individuals by stacked government monstrosities staffed by people who lose nothing but get paid outlandish amounts of money to do sfa That’s fine! It doesn’t matter who! It doesn’t matter the right or wrong!! Who gives a shit eh? It doesn’t matter as long as it is some conservatively minded person getting shafted! Never mind about right or wrong!

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      The Human Right Commission has always been a place for political parties to ‘park’ their excess political operatives, at the tax payer’s expense.

    • davidjwalshMEMBER

      it a shame flawse that it appears there are so few on this site with any sense/knowledge of recent history. The proliferation of ‘Commissions’ and ‘Tribunals’ with incredibly extensive legal powers to accuse, find guilty and punish individuals is one of the most terrifying aspects of social change in this country over the last 40 years.

      Our basic legal rights as citizens and as inheritors of the Common Law system have been systematically eroded to the extent that 2 perfectly normal [ethnically white] students have their rights as Brisbane Uni students and Australian citizens called into question on the say so of an ‘offended’ PCA (PC authoritarian). Our school age children are being compulsorily exposed to the social engineering of SJW gender propaganda………the blindness of people to the inevitable social and societal chaos that will and is playing out as a result of all this BS is mind blowing. All I can say is that I thank the gods (however anyone defines them) that I’ve delivered on my responsibilities to my children and have the resources to insulate myself against the shyte that is coming at us.

      As you have often stated flawse – the answers are back in time

      No-one knows when or how it going to hit the fan – but it will and it will hit very, very hard and very few people IMHO have any idea of how hard or what they will do when it all starts to unravel.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Our school age children are being compulsorily exposed to the social engineering of SJW gender propaganda […]

        Aaaand that’s the point at which you go from someone just confused about the HRC to an intolerant fuckwit.

      • ^^^ Does that comment abide by the Comment rules? Doesn’t appear to abide by number 1 or 4.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Yes Smithy,
        How Dare You! Offend and Abuse Someone, for their perceived act (by you) of offending and abusing someone else!
        Outrageous!

        People need to learn how to grow thicker Skin.

  10. drsmithyMEMBER

    The Prime Minister said the government was “defending the law by making it clearer” and better protecting Australians by ensuring that mere “slights” and the “taking of offence” no longer triggered section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

    They never did, so I guess do-nothing’s reputation remains intact.

  11. CornflakesMEMBER

    The idea of creating a distraction in politics works if the people want something to change. It doesn’t work when the people need something to change. That is why Howard was able to use distractions so well, at the time, the electorate only wanted things to be different. It is not going work this time; there is actually a need. It just looks like fiddling while Rome burns.

      • CornflakesMEMBER

        But the basic premise of “look over there” doesn’t work when you are watching a house burn down as opposed to a campfire.

      • I don’t disagree – but I’d suggest that even there was only a campfire, or maybe a candle, the current LNP would have a hard time getting anyone to look somewhere else.

  12. Excellent, a reprieve from the authoritarian left.
    Let’s be honest, we only allow one opinion on things like same sex marriage, which humans for millenia have not been comfortable with.
    Before you jump down my throat, I don’t really give a damn either way!

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      Excellent, a reprieve from the authoritarian left.

      Can you show us on the doll where the authoritarian left touched you ?

      Let’s be honest, we only allow one opinion on things like same sex marriage, which humans for millenia have not been comfortable with.

      For millennia humans were quite comfortable with the idea of owning other humans. Doesn’t mean it’s considered acceptable today (well, by most people).

      You can have any opinion you want. It’s when you use that opinion to impact others there might be a problem.

    • davidjwalshMEMBER

      Andrew, as you (and others) can see from drsmithy below in response to you and more revealingly in the accusation that I am an “intolerant fuckwit” in response to my post above…

      drsmithy is the perfect expression of the PCA behaviour that the SJW mindset excels at.

      Maybe drsmithy will sing a different tune if dragged into the Supreme Court as were the UQ students ……nah, smithy will always be one of the mob baying for the blood of the “intolerant fuckwit” who has infringed the latest version of SJW social engineering

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Andrew, as you (and others) can see from drsmithy below in response to you and more revealingly in the accusation that I am an “intolerant fuckwit” in response to my post above…

        You’re taking a factually incorrect viewpoint on the AHRC, then criticising programs designed to address bullying and exclusion run by people trying to reduce incidences of depression and suicide in children, justifying it with a combination of disgust at people who are different from you, and self-righteous conservative persecution syndrome.

        I’m open to other words that might describe such antisocial, destructive and hubristic behaviour, but I think mine summed it up succinctly.

        drsmithy is the perfect expression of the PCA behaviour that the SJW mindset excels at.

        Please tell us more about your understanding of “authoritarianism” is, and how providing an avenue for people being abused, harassed and bullied to protect themselves aligns with it.

        nah, smithy will always be one of the mob baying for the blood of the “intolerant fuckwit” who has infringed the latest version of SJW social engineering

        Indeed. Can you explain why I should feel bad about “baying for [the] blood” of people trying to hurt others, rather than your preferred criticism of people trying to protect those who want to hurt others ?

      • davidjwalshMEMBER

        @ drsmithy – ok, I’ll bite – even though it appears futile to try and penetrate the collectivist group think you regurgitate as an alternative to recognising common sense:

        you claim I have “disgust at people who are different from [me]” and that I suffer from “self-righteous conservative persecution syndrome” !!!!!!!!!!!

        Just WTF do you think you are. Keep it up you wonderful little snowflake. Cloak yourself in the robes of righteousness and intolerance of anyone who dares to not agree with your self appointed right to protect others from being “hurt”

        Join the real world diddums – you might be surprised what you find out there, including the fact that a lot of normal, decent hard working people (of all colours and beliefs) are pissed off with being told what to think, how to express themselves and how they must bow before the alter of PC/SJW thought control

      • That’s a real nasty case of hypocrisy you’ve got there.

        Just WTF do you think you are.

        Someone who isn’t just regurgitating other people’s rhetoric and labels with foam-flecked outrage. Do you need a tissue to wipe down your keyboard ?

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Id like to think we could be Pals Smithy, being fellow travellers and all.
        But Walshie makes a fair a point Brother.
        Im against bullying, Predjuiced and non inclusive behaviours just like you, I suspect Walshie is to,…but when you say,
        “why I should feel bad about “baying for [the] blood” of people trying to hurt others”, to justify agressive laws and prosecutions based on the subjective prism of ” Hurt Feelings” you are, IMHO, Opening a Pandoras box of almost infinate transgressions and advocating for a new form of intollerance.

        For Example I have Evangelical inlaws, biblical literalists, who through the process of following their belief system, have passed the message on to My Wife, Kids and I, that God hates sin, Christ died to forgive those sins and that by not recognizing this sacrifice Me and my family can look forward to an ETERNITY of misery in Hell,…where according to them, my father already is,…owing to our families Athiest beliefs.

        Hell is so awful a place according to the Brother inlaw that he’d rather his kids imprisoned, Raped, Tortured and Killed, but get to go to heaven,…than live a safe and happy life devoid of God and thus destined for Hell.

        True believing Christians, Muslims and Jews when simply expressing the main foundational tennants of their Religion, are more Guilty of expressing the most extream forms of Offensive, threatening and exclusionary behaviours.
        Beliefs so offensive to me, that if I found out the Christians were right, heaven was real, and I was desitned to hell with out my Repentance and accepting of JC as my saviour,.. I would still reject it all out of Solidarity for my father and all the other Good people sent to hell, by such a Filthy rapacious supernatural dictator
        (no doubt after several hours of torture down in said hell, I may reconsider my position).

        If you are demanding the removal of Offensive opinions that hurt fellings and condem others Smithy,…then you must be advocating for the outlawing of all the Abrahamic Religions,…a ridiculous proposition,…and yet you are being logically incosistant and hypocritical if you say that is not what you are advocating for.

        Also, just because someone is “offended” aby an utterance, should this qualify for someone else being dragged before the law, to prove they were not “trying to hurt others”
        Unworkable!!!!

      • […] to justify agressive laws and prosecutions based on the subjective prism of ” Hurt Feelings” you are […]

        Mate, I think you need to revisit your assumptions.

        If you are demanding the removal of Offensive opinions that hurt fellings and condem others Smithy […]

        I am not.

        As I have said before. The problem is not having opinions. The problem is harming others becaise of those opinions. People are free to think homosexual kids are filthy perversions of nature if they want, as I am free to vocally criticise them for having such repugnant opinions. But when they subsequently attack – or in the case of those with more influence, try to disassemble – programs (and the people who run them) intended to protect those homosexual kids from harm, or incite others to do likewise, they step over a big fucking black line from “having an opinion’ to “trying to harm others”.

        Likewise, a Christian or a Muslim might think I’m going to Hell because I’m an atheist. Whatever. But if they’re harassing and abusing me in public because they think that, the line is crossed.

        “Walshie” is not making a fair point. He is making factually incorrect assertions about how the HRC works (most notable, not only does it not take people to court, but it has a specific objective to AVOID people going to court) and baseless, paranoid, moral-panic-driven claims about programs intended to protect children from harm, because he doesn’t think those kids deserve protection. Because that’s what somebody else told him he should think (this part is apparent from the complete lack of any rational justification for his views when challenged, just more paranoid rhetoric and insults).

        Back to the actual topic. 18C has been around for twenty years. It has not in that time stifled free speech in any meaningful fashion. The only reason it has risen to prominence in the last few years is because one of the political right’s favourite bullies got done over by it. But, importantly, not because of his *opinions*, because of his lies. Andrew Bolt wasn’t found guilty because he had an opinion in a public forum about “professional Aborigines”, he was found guilty because he lied and attacked specific people based on their race in a public forum. Hopefully, you agree that a powerful individual using a bully pulpit to attack people based on their race (or, indeed, any other irrelevant attribute) is A Bad Thing.

        Could the RDA do with a bit of refinement ? Probably. Most legislation could (though in it’s context, “offend” and “insult” mean more than just hurting someone’s feelings). But it should be patently obvious that the people currently agitating for change are doing so in bad faith and for the wrong reasons, which is reason enough to oppose them.

      • davidjwalshMEMBER

        EP – you are correct on all points

        Given smithy’s reply to EP I think we all have to just accept smithy just doesn’t get it

        NOTE everyone – I am specifically avoiding using any ‘cis-normative’ pronouns for Smithy…..wouldn’t want to offend him/she/zis/zee/it/they – after all we all know that to use an incorrect or unwanted pronoun is a clear case of ‘hate speech’

      • Yes David, not worth the fight. Although the MSM would have us believe 7 people voted for Donald Trump and 99.9% of people support gay marriage and the sky is falling in on women, there’s a lot of us quietly disagreeing (drsmithy illustrates the point well why people don’t feel comfortable voicing non-leftist opinions) vehemently with the social engineering and increasingly totalitarian march of the left.

      • Given smithy’s reply to EP I think we all have to just accept smithy just doesn’t get it

        Mmmm. Possibly due to your inability to explain “it” in any sort of meaningful way.

        You guys are pretty funny though. Just so utterly shameless. No wonder you love Trump.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now