Human Rights Commission

To the left, there is no limit to the number of victims and minority groups that need saving and protection. In Australia, we have emotional protectionism which is using taxpayers’ money to fill lawyers’ pockets to take people to court over emotions and hurt feelings.

What are the origins of protecting emotions and feelings with legal force? There is no natural right to not be insulted, humiliated or hear hard facts, as Section 18C of Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act creates. 18C can be used to silence inconvenient speech a person does not wish not to hear. There are already existing laws against inciting violence or threatening speech.

There are many sensitive topics that people wish to discuss in a free society. We want to discuss the immigration rate, people want to express and practice their religious beliefs, we wish to discuss the failure of every leftist policy such as Aboriginal affairs or every other failed left policy they have manufactured. But no. Because of emotional protectionism we cannot. 

It is not for judges and Human Rights Commissioners to decide which political theories or religious thoughts are valid and which are not. Allowing the state to decide which opinions you may hold or what thoughts reduce people’s ability to have a discussion. If you want state-sanctioned enforced speech, look at what has happened to in Canada. 

Politicians like Penny Wong are redefining tolerance. She says you can have religious views or opinions so long as you do not live by them or express them. You must not live by those values if it upsets a protected minority group. It is a weaponized minority victimhood. Perceived victimized minorities are elevated above others. It should be a crime to offend, insult, ridicule or humiliate any minorities.

The left love to expand the shield of legal protection from objective harm to subjective harms. The rent-seeking human rights industry shops for victims. They are spruiking for complaints.

The manufacturers of emotional protectionism assisted by a weaponized Australian Human Rights Commission and Section 18C chant tolerance but are intolerant of any views but theirs.

They chant inclusiveness but shut down speakers and actively exclude others who do not submit to their ideology. They chant diversity but expect everyone to submit to them or else. They chant racism but then encourage more cultural apartheid and privileges based on skin colour. They chant sexism but then want quotas based on one’s sex.

Let us look at the reconciliation movement. As I have stated before, it was never about bringing all of Australians together. It is about extortion and perpetual compensation implemented by a cabal of planners who benefit from it. A grievance industry demands reparations. If you dissent from this ideology, you are the problem. You must understand white-guilt and white-privilege.

Australians know there is no separate class of citizens based on race, age, gender, religion or size. The Constitution should not honour one group above others, the High Court should not either. Certain extra voices and extra privileges based on skin color have no place in Australia.  There are many people who want to exploit and prolong any divisions. Cultural apartheid relies on division and a whole industry thrives on it. Lucrative jobs and a constant flow of public money rely on it.

The welfare industries which feed it are great to work in, but useless at resolving anything. They are command and control structures designed to weaken people and create subservience.

They are simply not designed nor intended to work. Their aim is to convince people they are not responsible for their own lives, that they are victims, and then they are puppets. Puppeteers simply pull the strings and yank the puppet to where it needs to go.

Some reconciliation activists refuse to want anything to do with the Australian nation.  Now, how can you be reconciled to people who want nothing to do with you? Those wanting Aboriginal people dependent rely on grievance and victim politics and want division to continue.

The Greens are not interested in self-sufficiency. Creating wealth and self-sufficiency is not their goal. Their goal is to be the masters and everyone else the slaves. Impoverishing Australia is their vision and having a collectivist society.

Top-down bureaucratic solutions are what they think works. The more on the public teat the better. Just so long as everyone gives up all their freedoms first. Do not take any notice of what the Greens say. Look only at what freedoms you will lose, which properties they want to take, and which properties they will take from earners to give to those who do not. They offer shiny objects belonging to others.

Their zeal for egalitarianism is extreme. Having children as serfs to the state is their ideology. Everything must come under the control of the state including your thoughts, freedoms, freedom of association, civil society, ownership of property, your farm, and what school you send your child or children to.

Author Details