Categories
News Opinion/Commentary

Should the lyrics to Advance Australia Fair change? Here are my thoughts.

Treble clef on Australian flag
Image: iStock

Should we change the lyrics to Australia’s national anthem Advance Australia Fair?

Queensland Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk  and New South Wales Premier, Gladys Berijiklian agree that we should.

The source of contention is the word “young” in the first verse:

Australians all let us rejoice

For we are young and free

(emphasis mine)

Berijiklian argues “young” ignores thousands of years of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history.

People like Berijiklian want the word “one” to replace it.

 

However, Herald Sun columnist and Sky News Australia presenter, Andrew Bolt blasted the proposal.

But the NSWPremier’s plan to change the words “young and free” to “one and free” is a con. The people she’s trying to please don’t want us to be “one” at all.

He argued that the people pushing these proposals want more division, not unity.

Proposals in the name of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander inclusion

Over recent years, people have debated a number of proposals in the name of righting past wrongs.

Every year in January, the date of Australia Day (January 26) is hotly debated. 26 January highlights the arrival of British explorer, Captain Arthur Philip in 1788.

Some Aboriginal people find this as a tragic day. It’s the day that signifies the start of their displacement and destruction.

Similarly, more and more Caucasian Australians have joined the chorus for change.

The push to change the date has extended to social media. The hashtag #changethedate has trended over the years. Activist group, GetUp! has called for the date to be changed to May 8.

Issues facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities

To be honest, I find a lot of this to be fluff. It will change nothing. Not on a fundamental level, anyway.

There are a number of  issues facing Indigenous communities. These include:

  • lack of educational opportunities
  • poorer mental health outcomes
  • crime and domestic violence

 

Discrimination and alienation

More Aboriginal people are opening up with their experiences of racism. Some have gone to the media with numerous examples of alleged discrimination they’ve faced in their lives.

Earlier this year, actor, Meyne Wyatt did a passionate monologue on ABC’s Q & A. Wyatt described security being suspicious of him, taxi drivers ignoring him and cashiers serving him last in stores.

 

Wyatt also spoke of the treatment of former Sydney Swans footballer, Adam Goodes. A then – 13 year – old called Goodes an ‘ape’. His actions in response was hotly debated. Many praised his actions. However, others condemned Goodes, repeatedly pointing out the girl’s age.

 

When Aboriginal people bring up either domestic violence or racism, they are immediately howled down. They can’t win.

 

Surely, a step in the right direction is to listen to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people speak. Let them speak about the issues affecting them and their communities.

 

I’ll say it again. None of these issues will change if our anthem does.

 

What are your thoughts? Should the lyrics of Advance Australia Fair change? Does it matter to you either way? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. 

Categories
News Opinion/Commentary

Oprah Winfrey, wealth and white privilege

Oprah's OWN billboard
Image: iStock

 

Talkshow and media mogul, Oprah Winfrey has come under fire for comments she made on white privilege. She was hosting her show Oprah’s Conversations.

When asked about white privilege and her status as a billionaire, Winfrey insisted that white people “still have their whiteness”.

 

The comments came in light of Black Lives Matter protests worldwide. The protests were triggered by the murder of George Floyd by a white police officer in May this year.

Republican Senator, Ted Cruz took to Twitter and condemned Winfrey’s comments as being “BS”.

Newscorp columnist and Sky News Australia host, Andrew Bolt claimed that Winfrey’s comments were “less about principle and more about power”.

Exactly what is white privilege?

So, what is ‘white privilege’? White privilege was a term popularised by Peggy McIntosh. In her 1988 essay, White Privilege; Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack, McIntosh bemoaned men for not realising privileges they have over women.

Then, she listed fifty ways in which white people had an advantage over people of colour in Western societies. These advantages, she pointed out, are often ignored by white people themselves.

Advantages McIntosh listed included:

  • Being able to spend time with people of her race comfortably
  • Being represented in history
  • Being sure that neighbours in a new residents will be pleasant
  • The assurance that white people will avoid being racially profiled in society
  • Being able to be an individual and not be pressured to speak for entire race (to be honest, I kind of agree with this one).
  • Being able to find representation in pop culture
  • Have freedoms in regards to activities and advantages at work without race being an issue.

More recently, a number of people of colour have claimed to have been victims of disadvantage because of the colour of their skin.

Earlier this year, Indigenous actor, Meyne Wyatt did a monologue on ABC’s Q & A about issues Aboriginal people face.

Criticisms and problems with white privilege theory

The theory of ‘white privilege’ has come under a lot of criticism. Canadian clinical psychologist, Jordan Peterson has slammed the concept of white privilege as “absolutely reprehensible” and that there’s “nothing more racist” than collective guilt.

Even supporters of Black Lives Matter are critical of it. In The Guardian, Kennan Malik argues that the focus on white privilege and ‘white guilt’ distracts people from the institutional causes of racial inequality.

My opinion on ‘white privilege’

Personally, I think emphasis on ‘white guilt’ only alienates people and makes them apathetic. It gives people the excuse not to combat racism.

The articles on white guilt have only left me frustrated. Very few, if any, of those article have offered any solutions that people like me can implement. Saying that all white people benefit from society or whatever, to me, doesn’t do anything to benefit people of colour.

I think ‘white guilt’ only paralyses people. What are you supposed to when you are the beneficiaries of a system because of the colour of your skin? You can’t change who your ancestors are.

The problem with white privilege also doesn’t offer solid solutions. Going on and on about it without providing solutions doesn’t help anybody.

 

What do you think about white privilege? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. 

Categories
Gender/ sexuality LGBTQ rights

LGBTQ+ Muslims deserve our support

Islam symbol and mosque (top), LGBTQ pride flag (bottom)
Images: iStock.

 

One thing I like about the broadcaster, SBS is how they often present minority and diverse communities.

Sometimes, minority identities clash. LGBTQ+ Muslims often feel this clash.

Last Thursday in the lead up to 2020 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, SBS Pride published an article on a Muslim Pride event coming up in London. It’s set to happen on April 11 after a successful crowdfunding campaign.

Unfortunately, the organisers and participants can expect backlash.

LGBTQ+ Muslims face opposition among Muslims and the LGBTQ+ community

It’s no secret that there is often hostility between Islam and LGBTQ+ people. Countries and provinces that implement Sharia law often outlaw homosexuality. The punishments for this ‘crime’ often include execution or other barbaric practices, such as flogging.

LGBTQ+ Muslims who grow up in Western countries are often ostracised and abused by their families and community. Lebanese – Australian, Hussein Hawley told the ABC his family tried to “beat the gay” out of him before kicking him out of home.

Like many other LGBTQ+ people, LGBTQ+ Muslims are at high risk of suicide.

LGBTQ+ people of colour face discrimination in LGBTQ+ spaces

Muslims are not the only people who struggle fitting within the LGBTQ+ community.

People of colour, (including non – Muslims) report being discriminated against.

According to Stonewall UK, 51% LGBTQ+ people of colour have experienced racism within the LGBTQ+ community. Unfortunately, this number rose to 61% for black people. This is not right and needs to be condemned.

LGBTQ+ Muslims and the no true Scotsman fallacy

When I was reading some comments on Facebook, I was disappointed, although not surprised. The whole ‘let’s see this happen  in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc’, came up. As if LGBTQ+ Muslims are responsible for theocratic and totalitarian regimes. Are LGBTQ+ Christians responsible for the likes of Steven Anderson or Roger Jiminez? I don’t think so. No doubt, LGBTQ+ Muslims may face uncertainty and de – programming and find their way through their beliefs. Many LGBTQ+ people of faith face similar struggles.

Plus, there was the No True Scotsman statements, i.e. ‘you can’t be gay and Muslim’. Here’s the thing: you can’t choose your sexual orientation or gender identity. And you can’t change it. Ask any LGBTQ+ Christian pushed into conversion therapy.

However, all people should be able to freely choose their faith. Everyone deserves the right to explore their faith and relationship with the divine.

LGBTQ+ people of faith also deserve the opportunity to participate in a community. And the LGBTQ+ community needs to be a viable option if their faith community isn’t.

The LGBTQ+ community often campaign for inclusive and non – discriminatory policies. Maybe it’s time that some of them walk the walk.

SBS’s coverage of Mardi Gras reflects diversity

SBS did a great job in broadcasting the Mardi Gras. I liked how they reflected the diversity within the LGBTQ+, including ethnic  and religious diversity. They’re often good like that.

 

I can only hope that all LGBTQ+ people will be able to feel welcomed in the future. I hope that Pride and the LGBTQ+ community as a whole will become a place where everyone can be their true selves and be embraced. I hope LGBTQ+ spaces become safe spaces for those who need it most.

 

Are LGBTQ+ spaces exclusionary to people of faith or colour? Have you felt excluded from an LGBTQ+ space? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

 

 

 

Categories
Opinion/Commentary

‘The Final Quarter’ sparks racism debate again

2016 and 2017 was plagued by same – sex marriage debate and LGBTQ+ rights. 2019 is about Indigenous Australians; their symbols, (i.e. whether people should be able to climb Uluru), whether Aboriginal people should be mentioned in the Australian Constitution as the ‘First Australians’ and whether there should be an extra body for Indigenous people in the Australian parliament.

Now, the Adam Goodes controversy has been revisited.

The Final Quarter caused a stir,  even  before premiering on free – to – air TV last Thursday.

It is about former Sydney Swans star, Adam Goodes. A media storm erupted after Goodes called out a thirteen – year – old female Collingwood supporter who called him an ape. Unfortunately, this caused a backlash against Goodes that lasted two seasons.

AFL embroiled in race debate

After calling out the thirteen – year – old, Goodes did a press conference, which only added fuel to a raging fire.

I don’t think Goodes saying “racism has a face” was a smart choice. It’s been used against him ever since. However, Goodes did everyone to back off because she was only a kid. He didn’t want her to be charged or harassed.

I’ve also heard that Goodes wasn’t behind the move for police to interview the teenager. Was that an overreaction from the AFL itself?

Australia Day controversy

Goodes became Australian of the Year in 2014. While it seemed like an uplifting move; an Indigenous man receiving one of Australia’s most celebrated awards, it quickly added tension and division. Goodes used his platform to raise contentious issues, such as the ‘Recognise‘ campaign and condemning alleged atrocities committed by early British settlers.

 

The role of the media

A number of commentators and journalists did, and continue to defend Adam Goodes and condemn the spectators and his critics.

Others pointed fingers at  Goodes. Whilst calling the constant booing  of Goodes “bullying“, Newscorp columnist and TV presenter, Andrew Bolt has repeatedly criticised Goodes for his “over reaction” over being called an ape.

Bolt has suggested that Goodes admit he was wrong and he may have got critics’ respect again.

He, along with other commentators, have repeatedly criticised Goodes’ press conference in the aftermath of being called an “ape”. (the video I posted above).

Frankly, I hate how Goodes’ critics pick out the unfortunate statement “racism has a face”, while often ignoring Goodes’s defence of the girl. Herald Sun’s and Sky News Australia’s Rita Panahi did that only last week on Outsiders. (To his credit, Bolt has put the comment in context).

My verdict on ‘The Final Quarter’

Yes, it was largely biased. It was obviously told from the perspectives of Adam Goodes and his defenders.

It paints an unfortunate picture of what went down. I believe that Adam Goodes was bullied and that the whole saga got out of hand. It should have never got that bad.

It showed how the media often inflamed the situation. Did Goodes always do or say the right thing? Probably not. That’s not an excuse for repeatedly taking his words out of context, even six years later. Nothing can excuse for bad behaviour against Goodes (surprisingly, some of the spectators agree and have apologised).

Believe it or not, I think there is an upside to the whole Adam Goodes saga. It gave Indigenous people courage to voice their own experiences of racism. I remember being almost emotional when  former Labor president, Warren Mundine AO admitted the psychological toll racial abuse had on him.

Actress, Miranda Tapsell also spoke up about racism.

 

I think The Final Quarter, like Adam Goodes himself, hit a raw nerve for many people. Let’s hope we can find a way to move past it.

If this post has raised any issues, contact Beyond Blue on 1300 224 636.

Categories
News Opinion/Commentary

ABC exposed former members of the Australian Alt – Right

 

When I think of ‘Alt – Right’ or ‘neo – Nazi’ movements, I think of the U.S. or Ukraine. There have been political scandals where the Alt – Right has tried to infiltrate parties. However, individuals haven’t been identified (not that I’ve seen).

Until now.

ABC names and interviews two former white supremacists

The ABC did an article identifying two self – confessed former white supremacists. They collaborated with the Sydney Morning Herald for the investigation.

Canberra couple, Lisa and Justin Beulah are self -confessed former white supremacists. Their aim was not only to spread their hatred toward other races, Jews and LGBTQ+ people, but also infiltrate political parties.

They were involved in the white supremacy infiltration scandal that rocked the NSW Young Liberals and Nationals. They were two out of the twenty – two that were permanently banned from the Nationals.

Discord account expose troubling ideology

Both Justin and Lisa were active on the message app Discord. Their accounts were leaked to independent media outlet Unicorn Riot.

The Discord messages that the ABC were troubling. Lisa, under the username MsNatSocialist expressed a love for Adolf Hitler and a desire for a 1940’s themed wedding with men wearing Nazi uniform costumes. Lisa defended herself saying she said that to keep herself welcomed into the Discord chat.

There was also a chat where Laura made a mockery of a victim in the Charlottesville riots. She defended the chat saying it was a ‘joke’.

Have they reformed?

I can’t say for certain whether the Beulahs have reformed or not. However, going by what I’ve read and seen, they may have reformed later than what they claim.

In the televised interview, Justin and Lisa insisted that they had reformed, pointing  out that if they were still white supremacists, they wouldn’t have agreed to do the interview.

754B2D14-1082-433B-9D1A-DE042F8424CC

 

A caution to the left and right

The Beulah’s story does really highlight the ugliness of white supremacy and antisemitism. Often, people who point out racism are slammed as politically correct or even accused of racism themselves. With the Beulahs, I don’t think their former activities are debatable. The Left should learn not to throw racism too liberally, either. Over the ears, I haven’t liked the way people use racism purely to smear others. Reading this article has just cemented my stance.

 

White supremacy is obviously not only ugly, but also dangerous. I don’t think it should be something that anyone in their right mind should or would aspire to.

 

A final thought on the article. I note the ABC’s mention that Laura was a fan of Pauline Hanson and her party One Nation.While I’m not a huge fan of Pauline Hanson or One Nation, I don’t think it’s fair to associate her with former white supremacists without givingPauline or another party member a chance to defend themselves. While I think One Nation have had issues, I thought that linking One Nation to Lisa’s radicalisation is unfair.

Did you read the article ‘Married to the Alt Right or watch the interview? What did you think about it? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

Categories
News Opinion/Commentary

Let’s hope Sky News Australia cleans up its act

 

Sky News Australia buckled when they received backlash over  an Adam Giles’ interview with former United Patriots Front chairmann and self – confessed Neo – Nazi, Blair Cottrell last Sunday.

Cottrell is known for his extreme anti – immigration and anti – Semitic views and conspiracy theories, describing Jews as ‘parasites’ and has expressed that Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf should be read in schools. He has also been in legal trouble when he staged a mock beheading in 2015, as well as violent crimes.

Two regular presenters, Laura Jayes and David Speers attacked the decision both on social media and on air.

Quite frankly, I don’t know what Sky News Australlia was thinking. Surely they knew about his history and his association with UPF. I was almost thinking about deleting my Foxtel apps and abandon Sky News Australia altogether. This is for two main reasons: one, they should have known who Cottrell was and what he was known for, and two; this isn’t the first scandal that Sky News Australia has been involved in. There was the badly handled David Leyonheljm interview on Outsiders last month, and  there was Mark Latham’s attack on a Sydney school student about his alleged sexuality, (fortunately he was sacked for that, but has been on a few times since).

I wonder whether the interview was deliberate and the apology was only issued because of the backlash from current and former staff and the public. This also comes less than a month until Sky News Australia will be on free – to – air TV as part of the Win Network. Coincidence?

It has got to be said that Sky News Australia hasn’t been the only station that has allowed Cottrell air time. Both Channel Seven and the ABC have had Cottrell on  their news/ commentary programs. All should have known better. The management, as well as presenters should have known who he is and the impact people like him have. This Blair Cottrell incident is particularly ironic given his history of anti – Semitism and many presenters’ fierce defense of Jews and Israel.

I do applaud Jayes, Speers and Andrew Bolt for criticising Sky News and Giles’ passivity during the interview. It is great to see that a number of employees are willing to speak up against the decision. One commentator, Craig Emmerson, left the station in revolt. His father fought the Nazis and was their POW in World War II.

Sky News Australia has some great shows and I have enjoyed watching some of the presenters. But I won’t tolerate hard – Right extremism and gutlessness from presenters when faced with bigotry.

Let’s hope this is the last scandal we hear about Sky News Australia. Let’s hope they go back to the centre a bit.

(CW rape threat)

If it’s not bad enough that Sky News Australa invited an anti – Semite and thug on air,  things even became uglier when Cottrell turned on Laura Jayes, implying she should have been raped on air.

Let’s hope Sky News Australia (and other stations) can reign in extremism from now on.

Another update:

Sky News Australia CEO, Angelos Frangopoulos made a statement promising that Cottrell will not be featured on the station again.

Let’s hope that’s the case.

Categories
Media

Red Symons Racist? Probably not. Controversial? Hell, yes.

This week, former guitarist and ‘Hey, hey, it’s Saturday’ regular, Red Symons came under fire for “What’s the deal with Asians?” podcast interview on ABC’s Radio National with Beverley Wang, who is Canadian of Taiwanese descent. I didn’t hear the interview (an Andrew O’Keeffe trick, ha!), but from what I read here, it seemed nothing more than satire.

I agree with Andrew Bolt in that calling Wang “yellow” was quite crass and unnecessary. Then again, Symons is well – known for controversy and crassness. I grew up watching him on “Hey, Hey It’s Saturday” back in the early 1990’s. He was a panellist on “Red Faces”, a skit where Symons and other panellists ‘judged’ performances. Red Symons was the ‘bad guy’, well and truly. And some people thought Ian ‘Dicko’ Dickson and Kyle Sandilands were bad on Australian Idol! Sheesh!

Back in the 1970’s, Symons was one of the guitarists in Melbourne – based band, Skyhooks. They were controversial. They caused such a stir that in 1974 due to their provocative lyrics that fours songs from their debut album ‘Living in the ’70’s’ were banned from commercial airplay.

Skyhooks' 1990 'Latest and Greatest'
Skyhooks’ 1990 ‘Latest and Greatest which features two songs that were banned from airplay in 1974.

 

Did they mean any harm? Probably not. It was just satire. Biting satire, offensive satire, but none the less, satire.

With this particular interview, I get race, migration and in particular, boat people are sensitive topics, especially given the ongoing controversy of Nauru and Manus Island, plus the ongoing debate of our refugee intake.  Since then, Symons has apologised and the ABC has deleted the interview from its website.

I hope this is as far as it goes. I do think as a society we do need to be careful, both of what we expect from artists, but I do think it’s important that everyone in the public eye or with a wide platform (myself included), need to be careful not to cause harm to the people we talk/ write/ joke about. It’s a real balancing act.

Did you hear the podcast? Did you think it was offensive? 

Categories
Politics

Extending 18C the Racial Discrimination Act is a bad idea

 In the midst of debate on changing 18C of Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act 1975, the Labor Party have said they wanted the law extended. They want the LGBTQ+ community, people with a disability as well as racial minorities to be protected. So, it would be an offence to offend, insult, humiliate people on basis of race, ethnic background, disability and sexual orientation.

As someone with a disability and someone who isn’t straight, I have one thing to say on the proposal – GOD PLEASE NO!!!!

No, no, no, no, no. i can’t say this enough! The way 18C has been used already has proven to be disastrous: the students from Queensland University of Technology and the case against the late The Australian cartoonist Bill Leak suggest, while defendants were not prosecuted, the law does more to destroy people’s reputations rather than actually making Australia a safe country for racial minorities – the original intent of the law.

 

One of the fears is that if 18C was extended, it will silence opponents of same – sex marriage. I get that this is an emotional issue to many in the LGBTQ+ community. But this isn’t the right way to go about it. This extension will not stop homophobes or racists. In fact, I fear it will only aggravate people, not win support for the people that are meant to be protected. Anti – discrimination measures brought into law by the Obama Administration in the U.S. has already backfired with anti – trans laws (e.g. HB in North Carolina), being put forward by hard-line Republicans across the country.

Meanwhile, in Australia, I fear that the Left and so – called LGBTQ+ allies should embrace for a similar pushback. The latest events, such as the Cooper’s Brewery/ Bible society backlash, I believe that would have only confirmed to opponents exactly why LGBTQ+ people SHOULDN’T get legal rights. They won’t be won over if they feel their rights to freedom of speech, conscience, etc are being threatened. Also, there will be an increase – not decrease – support for policies such as multiculturalism.

 

Personally, I say scrap 18C altogether and replace it with an anti – hate crimes Act. This can be used to combat things like Antisemitism, which seems to be at alarming levels around the world now. There is likely going to be a case in Canada real soon where an Imam is going to be charged when he preached that Jews should be killed, (by the way, the controversial Imam has  also received condemnation from other Muslims). Along with anti – defamation and possibly anti – discrimination laws in regarding services, (well, that’s another can of worms for another day), that’s all minorities should need. I think the majority of liberals and conservatives can agree with anti – hate crime measures. Nobody has a right to physically harm or threaten another person.

 

While safety does need to be considered, stifling thought and speech has proven to do more harm than good. Too often, laws like 18C have left people feeling silenced and frustrated, rather than help people its allegedly supposed to protect. Maybe it’s time for a rethink.

Do you support a change to Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act? Do you think such laws should be scrapped or extended to protect other groups? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Politics

Racial Discrimination Act: change? Scrap?

The raging debate over 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act is still still red hot to some commentators, especially Andrew Bolt. The case involving seven students from Queensland University of Technology – three of which were taken to court by Cindy Prior – after the students were told to leave a computer lab allegedly reserved for Aboriginal students. The boys protested on Facebook, calling it “fighting segregation with segregation” and one asking sarcastically where the “white supremacist” computers were. One of the defendants Callum Thwaites was also accused of using the “N” word, but has emphatically denied it.

While the case was dropped and Prior was demanded that she pay thousands in legal fees, which allegedly sent her bankrupt. While the defendants were ruled as being innocent of any crime, their careers have allegedly being trashed. According to Bolt, Alex Wood explained how his future had been badly damaged and his chosen career had been destroyed:

At that point in my life, it all sort of hit me at once. I was afraid. I felt that uni had been for nothing. I had studied quite hard and had a GPA of 6.3, and I thought that was going to go down the drain. I thought I was going to lose my job and potentially not be able to get a job after uni. I thought my friends would shun me if they thought I was racist. I honestly believe 18C was extremely close to ruining my life and still has the potential to do so.

There were absolutely no winners in this case. Reading about this case,  especially what Wood has said has made me change my mind about 18C. The fact it got as far as it did and had such devastating consequences on everyone involved.

There are three options that are often brought up when discussing this case and 18C – scrap the section, take the words “insult” and “offend” out of the section or leave it exactly how it is. I wonder if there could be another option – have a blanket anti – hate – crimes act that covers race, religion, sexuality,  gender identity, etc.Currently, Australia has a number of anti – discrimination acts, both State and Federal. Why not make it all one?

I would say too, that words like “offend” should be avoided. Why? Because they are too vague and open to interpretation. So what should an anti – hate crimes act entail. Well, quite simply, it should make it unlawful to attack someone because of race, gender, sexuality, etc. I also think that anti discrimination provisions for employers and services should remain. It’s just that, I believe that QUT case has proven that 18C doesn’t work. Even if you win, you lose. There needs to be a line drawn. There is no room for incitement to violence or deliberate discrimination or abuse in our society. However, what I find so heartbreaking is when well – meaning people are dragged through mud and the mud sticks no matter what they say. That’s what I think about the case against Andrew Bolt in 2011. I didn’t read the two articles that got him sued and were banned by the court, but I have since read his arguments since. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard Bolt being branded a racist. Last night on Sky’s ‘Paul Murray Live’, I saw a clip where Labor Senator, Sam Dastyari – who is Iranian born – ranted against changes to 18C. While he didn’t call Bolt by name, it was obvious, I think, that the tirade was partly aimed at him. Unsurprisingly, Murray condemned Dastyari’s speech.

I just don’t think 18C as it is is working. It may have had it’s place in 1975 when the Act was first introduced, but something has gone off. I think it needs to be mended so it can’t be open to interpretation as easy. Like I said, what about have a blanket anti – hate crimes Act instead plus workplace and services protections?

What do you think about 18C? Do you think it should be mended? Scrapped? To those who are in other countries, what anti – discrimination laws do you have? Do you think they work or are adequate? What changes would you like to see? I know these are quite a few full on questions. Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments. 

Categories
Politics

Progressives, it’s time we change tactic

‘The Specator’s’ Brendan O’Neill offered an analysis on what was behind Trump’s victory.

I think the self – described Marxist may have a point. Maybe a Trump win as U.S.’s 45th President is a warning to politicians, and also cultural progressives. People don’t like to be told to shut up. They don’t like to see the next generation of adults treated as precious petals. They are sick of the double standards people practice when they criticise Christianity (which is sometimes justified, I must say), but are deathly silent on Islam.

People are tired of being told they can’t do what they want to their own bodies. When it comes to issues like smoking, the possible effects of passive smoking and littering do need to be considered, but people argue it’s gone too far.

Also, people are sick of being abused. And conservatives cop some revolting abuse, including here in Australia. A number of Trump supporters were violently assaulted in the lead up to the election. Even after the election, riots have still occurred. Then, there was the torture of an 18 – year – old disabled man by an African American gang in Chicago. The ordeal lasted between 24 and 48 hours.

While things in Australia haven’t been as extreme, many causes has been hijacked by the far – Left, leaving scores of people disillusioned. This is where Safe Schools lost the plot. I agree that LGBTQ+ students and families should be supported. I also applaud how resources like ‘All of Us’ acknowledged other identities in the LGBTQ+ community and how it went beyond the gay/ straight dichotomy. Unfortunately, much of the ‘information’ in the program was deemed age inappropriate and was based on far – Left gender and feminist theory, rather than up –  to – date psychology and research. Not to mention founder, Roz Ward’s conference where she revealed that Safe Schools was not intended to be an anti – bullying program. To make matters even worse, the ‘Herald Sun’ and ‘The Australian’ published photos of its founder, Roz Ward assaulting an Australian Trump supporter.

 

People are worried. People have been hurt by institutions and systematic injustices have gone on for way too long. Homophobia, bi – phobia and racism destroys lives, but this isn’t the way to fight it. It only scares off would – be allies and only confirms to the Right what they already think.

 

Enough’s enough. Time for change. We need to stop the abuse and the hypocrisy. We need to allow others to speak without fear of being howled down. Should we tolerate homophobia, racism and the like? No. But we shouldn’t guilt people for having genuine concerns, either. If people are out of line, then offer a counter argument – with facts, statistics, logic and so on. Also, condemn violence/ abuse when committed by other members of the Left. If you look at any of Secular Talk videos on YouTube, Kyle Kulinski does this very well. David Rubin isn’t too bad either. They aren’t closed to debate – in fact, they’re all for it. Kulinski, in particular, is a hardcore libertarian. While I don’t agree with all of what Kulinski says, it’s what the modern Left needs – someone who encourages debate and someone with enough conviction that they are willing to call out wrongdoing when they see/ hear it. I think if we progressives do that, then maybe things may turn around.

 

What do you think about what’s going to happen in the next few years? What do you think about the result of the U.S. Election?