And there the pond was thinking it was all about freedom.
Silly pond, it's all about setting a trap for lefties and greenies, and a diabolical one at that.
Kerr began:
George Brandis is setting a diabolical trap for Labor and the Greens. He intends to force them to declare. Do they believe in human rights, in particular the right of Campbell Newman to act as a quasi fascist thug, or simply in pandering to complaining constituencies in exchange for political support? The Attorney-General began to bait his trap with the announcement yesterday of the appointment of Institute of Public Affairs policy analyst Tim Wilson to the Human Rights Commission as "freedom commissioner", but this is only part of the plan.
Brandis has thought deeply about rights and liberty during the past few years, and has decided Queensland simply isn't fascist enough.
He watched Labor's attempts to stifle free speech and cow the media and impugn the brave quasi-fascist endeavours of Campbell Newman. He has considered both the philosophical and political dimensions of the issues involved. And he came to government with an audacious plan to help further Newman's plans to turn Queensland into a fascist state.
Oh dear, the New Zealand subbies got that entirely wrong.
What a muck up. It seems Christian Kerr completely failed to mention Campbell Newman, an outrageous and shocking omission, but what can you do? No more fush and chups you wretched NZ subbies for the rest of the week, and that goes for your seagulls too ...
Meanwhile, in reality, Kerr has scribbled the most astonishing suck-up the pond has yet sighted in any Murdoch rag in quite some time, not that there should be anything wrong with sucking, in the right time and place:
The Attorney-General studied human rights law at Oxford under the famed legal philosopher and constitutional scholar Ronald Dworkin.
He was also taught by Joseph Raz, a giant in legal, moral and philosophical circles but little known outside the academic world.
After he returned to Australia, Brandis spent eight years teaching jurisprudence at the University of Queensland, concentrating on the work of the great liberal and libertarian philosophers, figures such as the American thinkers Robert Nozick and John Rawls.
This has led Brandis to develop a personal philosophy of human rights and politics.
Lordy, lordy, well no doubt Brandis was exercising his deep personal philosophy of politics when he said:
I intend to continue to call to the attention of the Australian people to the extremely alarming, frightening similarities between the methods employed by contemporary green politics and the methods and the values of the Nazis.
Because freedom is the freedom to invoke the Nazis, and not offer even a ha'penny to the Godwin's Law swear jar!
Strange, because in other contexts, George got a little agitated about making idle comparisons to Nazis.
You see, there was the matter of the book banning, because nothing reflects a deeper personal philosophy of human rights than the right to ban a book or two:
A Federal Government senator is demanding the withdrawal of a school library book which paints his political hero and Australia's longest-serving prime minister as a tyrant.
Sir Robert Menzies is listed alongside the likes of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler, Cambodian ruler Pol Pot and the deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the children's reference book 100 Greatest Tyrants, which is used by students at a Mount Isa high school.
Senator George Brandis has slammed the book, by British author Andrew Langley, describing it as offensive and inappropriate for history studies in any Australian school. "Of course it's absurd," Senator Brandis said.
"It introduces students to the notion that there is a kind of moral equivalence between some of the most evil men in the history of the world and an Australian political leader who has been a beacon of liberal democracy." (Call for book ban).
Or when you say Nazi, it's outrageous, but when I say Nazi, what a wonderful metaphor it is.
And let's not forget George's rampant feminism:
Senator Brandis, who has a son and daughter, believes Ms Gillard's "vehement" reaction is out of proportion - and that's because she doesn't have children.
"I think that most parents, in fact, all - any parent I can think of would agree with what Tony Abbott said," he told ABC radio.
"I think Julia Gillard who is - has chosen not to be a parent - and, you know, everybody respects her right, in the vehemence of her reaction, in fact, shows that she just doesn't understand the way parents think about their children when they reach a particular age." (here)
Indeed, indeed, because let's face it, you should only speak freely or indulge in free speech if you have been, are or are about to be, a breeder. It's only fair.
Meanwhile, up in Queensland, people are being locked up for many months in solitary confinement and there's not a word of blather from the likes of Christian Kerr.
There's nothing more astonishing than the sight of a sycophant who turns, and Christian Kerr, ever since he's left Crikey and joined the reptiles at the lizard Oz, has turned into the most amazing sycophant doing the rounds. Why he makes Uriah Heep look like a stumble bum ...
All this handwringing about the Bolter getting done, and not a word, not even a handwringing, about what's going down in Queensland, because some people don't deserve to have rights ...
Meanwhile there's all this rhetorical bullshit and peacock strutting going down, because allegedly it's all about the media and in particular the right of Murdochians to be even more offensive:
The Attorney-General sees the new Human Rights Commissioner as a strong and capable ally.
"I chose Tim Wilson for this role because I saw in him a person who had the philosophical integrity, political smarts and personal toughness to take this cause to the heart of the action," he says.
And he has made it clear that he will press on with his agenda in the face of opposition from the ALP: "If the Labor Party does decide to adopt an anti-freedom position then we will deal with the crossbench senators," Brandis says.
Wilson, too, is spoiling for a fight.
"I'll be putting freedom on the offensive, where it belongs," he tells The Australian. He nominates free speech and media freedom as his two key priorities, saying both had come under attack under the last government.
"Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are essential for a free society," Wilson says.
"A free media is a direct extension of the importance of free speech and are one and the same in importance.
"We need to remove the restrictions that have stopped people saying what they think and believe. "Only through a contest of ideas will our society flourish," Wilson continues, condemning the proposals by the previous Labor government to change anti-discrimination laws to ban conduct that "offends or insults".
"We shouldn't have restrictions on what may offend or insult because they just end up restricting speech and stop incorrect ideas being challenged and rebutted," the new commissioner says.
Oh yes, the knob polishers and the hagiographers are out in force today.
But could anyone swallow this clarion call at the end of Kerr's shameless knob-polishing?
Now, the fight for freedom is on. The trap has been set.
Oh fuck off, or better still, fuck off to Queensland and Campbell Newman's domain and see how your talk of the fight for freedom goes down ...
And if you want more nausea and a reliable failure to mention Campbell Newman, you can also dial up
Wilson himself:
Yes, where are the advocates having a go at Campbell Newman?
Well the pond will leave anyone who cares or can be bothered to get around the Oz's paywall, the bamboo curtain with which it veils information and opinion - because such things can't be free - to read Wilson blathering on in The building blocks for a free society.
You won't find a single word or thought about Queensland or Campbell Newman or what has been going down in recent times in that blighted state.
Instead you'll find the usual rhetoric about the Bolter:
As human rights commissioner I will seek to reorient the human rights debate towards liberal democratic values and the philosophy of individual freedom. The most obvious freedom of speech issue this parliament will face is the Coalition's promise to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. Section 18C has recently been controversial because of the Andrew Bolt case but, as its supporters are first to say, it has been used against many other Australians.
I will be urging the full repeal of section 18C. It is an unjustifiable limitation on free expression. The best way to undermine offensive or hateful language is not to shut it down, it is to challenge it, expose it for its flaws. The solution is more speech.
It is a central tenet of liberal democracy that the government's primary task is to protect our human rights, not restrict them.
Except of course if you're a bikie. You deserve no rights, you have no rights, a cockroach deserves more freedom.
And so the Bolter will be free to vilify and insult and offend and get his facts wrong and strut the stage in the most shameless way imaginable. But when it comes to difficult matters in relation to perceived outcasts, it all gets too hard ...
So the work of Campbell Newman in restricting rights can proceed apace, and neither Brandis nor Wilson will lift a rhetorical finger ...
Why not have a read of Peter Callaghan SC in Campbell Newman taking lessons from Vladimir Putin, Mr Wilson, scribbling back in November?
...today we can again gauge, precisely, the amount of respect that the government has for parliamentary process. A parliamentary committee that ought to be given at least a month to look at these laws has all of one day. That task cannot be completed in that time, at least not with intellectual rigour. One senses that even this act of tokenism is viewed as an inconvenience. You can almost hear muttering to the effect that Putin does not have to worry about the scrutiny of parliamentary committees.
It is not as if the Bill is uncontroversial. In fact, it cloaks daggers aimed at the heart of the rule of law. For example, once this law is passed, a citizen's liberty will potentially be affected not just by what they did, or what they belonged to at the time of an alleged offence. Freedom is now to be threatened if a person is or at any time has been a member of a relevant organisation. It is sickening to think that the language of Joseph McCarthy is now part of the Law of Queensland. And remember, “organisations” are not limited to groups of “bikies”.
It is just wrong to change someone's status in the eyes of the law because of something they did long ago, back when that something was perfectly legal. At any given time, the law must be certain. All citizens are entitled to know the laws that apply to them on any given day, and not to have their conduct condemned years after the event.
It is sheer folly to claim that such a change can ever be justified because of an “emergency”. An executive government that thinks it can legislate retrospectively is a government for which anything is possible, because it can provide its own definition of “emergency”. If it thinks it can legislate retrospectively, there is nothing to stop it from removing long-standing pension entitlements because of a financial “emergency”, or retrospectively invalidating a well-established planning law because of a housing “emergency”.
It is hard to see how the fact that someone belonged to a motorcycle club 40 years ago could create a sense of panic in anyone. It is actually doubtful whether the majority of Queenslanders were feeling any sense of “emergency” that could justify a law like this. But a different sort of problem does now confront us, as it does any society that allows legislation of this kind.
Retrospective legislation is condemned by every civilised nation in the world. These countries hold to the values expressed in Article 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a Covenant supported by most countries on the planet. However, there is a short list of places in the world – such as North Korea – where the beliefs that underpin that Covenant are clearly not valued.
It cannot be good for Queensland's "brand name" to be associated with the countries on that list. But we are now a place where, at any given time, the law should be considered uncertain. That is not good for business.
It would be nice to think that the discussion about this issue could take place in language at least worthy of a high school debate. Instead, we can anticipate repetition of clichés and parroting of the term “tough new laws”. Understand this – our laws were always tough. Whether the police and the CMC were sufficiently resourced to enforce them is another matter. The same politicians who control those resources should not be allowed to distract from their failings by describing retrospective legislation as “tough”. Call it – and the rest of this nonsense - what it is: radical, disproportionate and obnoxious.
It should be remembered that the way a government behaves towards the democratic process is only a manifestation of the way they would behave towards each of us individually – by definition, we are the democracy.
And when any one of us senses that we are being treated with utter disrespect, it does not take long for that feeling to become mutual. (here)
That's where the rubber really hits the freedom road, in George Brandis's and Campbell Newman's Queensland, and all Tim Wilson's screeching about the long suffering Bolter doesn't do a whit or a jot about it ...
Time will tell if Wilson is actually a brave freedom fighter or a poseur wanker blathering on for his mates, and seeing all the evils as being on the side of leftists and greenies.
Campbell Newman offers him the ideal chance, and now Wilson can do more about it than banging on for a few minutes on The Drum, here.
Thus far ... silence, not a mention, talk of Newman going too far forgotten ... while in print copious tears are shed about the Bolter and the Murdochian media ...
And expert knob-polisher Christian Kerr gets on with the whimsical knob-polishing.
(Below: gee, there does look like there's a family connection)
Too bloody right, Dorothy, the bastards...
ReplyDelete