It is often the first instinct of the far left, when
confronted with ideas or opinions they don’t approve of, to try to shut them
down.
There was a tiny but telling example of this in a letter to
the Dominion Post a few days ago from a reader who didn’t like
my column outlining the advance of neo-Marxism. He said it was “disappointing”
(note the morally superior tone and phony sanctimony) to see such opinions
being given oxygen by a “credible New Zealand paper”.
In other words, he didn’t like what I said, so I should have
been censored. Well, suck it up, buster. It’s called free speech.
But a far more serious and alarming threat to freedom of
expression has emerged with attempts to bar two so-called “far right”
speakers from entering New Zealand next month.
There’s the first problem, right there. Both the New
Zealand Herald and Radio New Zealand’s Morning Report used
that term “far right” to describe the Canadians Lauren Southern and Stefan
Molyneux, who are planning to follow a tour of Australia with a single
engagement in Auckland.
I hadn’t consciously heard of Southern before today and was
only vaguely aware of Molyneux, but experience has taught me to be very
sceptical when the media refer to anyone as “far right”. It’s a subjective
judgment that has no place in a news story, which we rightly expect to be
unbiased (in contrast with this blog, which is clearly an expression of
opinion).
Decoded, “far right” can mean anyone to the right of the
political centre. To be consistent, the Herald should have
described the activist Valerie Morse, who wants the Canadians kept out of New
Zealand, as “far left”. But of course it didn’t, and thus it gave her an aura
of political legitimacy that it denied to the Canadians.
In any case, whether or not Southern and Molyneux are “far
right” – however that’s defined – is neither here nor there. We live in a
liberal democracy that depends on free speech and the free exchange of ideas
and opinions. Let’s hear for ourselves what the Canadians have to say and
decide then whether it’s dangerous.
When it comes to free speech, I’m an absolutist. The only
exceptions should be blatant incitements to cause harm. The moment we give in
to the clamour from left-wing bigots seeking to stifle ideas they disapprove
of, or for that matter anyone trying to stifle ideas they
disapprove of (although it’s invariably the left that pushes for political
censorship and suppression), we’re stuffed. Book-burning won’t be far behind.
It will surprise no one that the push to have Southern and
Molyneux barred from New Zealand comes from Auckland Peace Action, whose
spokeswoman, the serial protester Morse, claims the Canadians are coming to New
Zealand to “empower local racists and to encourage racist violence”.
It’s perhaps more surprising that the New Zealand Federation
of Islamic Organisations is backing the call for a ban. This is not what New
Zealand Muslims should be doing if they want to persuade us that they reject
the totalitarian theology of many of their co-religionists
elsewhere.
So just what makes the two Canadians so poisonous? According
to Radio New Zealand, they have “far-right, alternative” views on feminism,
gender, Islam and mass immigration.
As one example of their extreme, “alternative” positions,
RNZ cited Southern’s statement that there are “only two genders”. It’s an
indication of how totally the so-called progressives have seized control
of the public conversation that Southern could be held up as a pariah for
expressing an opinion that’s shared by many New Zealanders – possibly even a
majority – and which only a few years ago would have been considered utterly
unremarkable.
Judging by an audio clip played by RNZ, Southern has also
inflamed leftists and feminists by calling out the exquisite hypocrisy of their
position on Islam, a religion they’re so eager to empathise with that they
conveniently turn a blind eye to its repression of women.
We're told that Southern was barred from speaking in
Britain, as if that’s all the justification the New Zealand government needs to
turn her away. In fact she’s only one of several speakers to have been detained
or turned back at British airports on the spurious pretext that their presence
was “not conducive to the public good” or was “likely to incite tensions”,
which really meant that they made the timid authorities feel a bit queasy.
But this shouldn’t be a case of “where Britain goes, we go”,
to use Michael Joseph Savage’s famous line. Far from giving New Zealand a lead,
all the British bans demonstrate is that the country from which we inherited
our democratic traditions has betrayed its honourable record as a defender of
free speech. We can’t allow the same thing to happen here.
Back to Val Morse. The Herald quotes her as
saying: “They [Southern and Molyneux] come to recruit people to their fascist
ideology. It is imperative that this type of racism is given no room to be
promoted and encouraged in Aotearoa. If they come here, we will confront
them on the streets. If they come, we will blockade entry to their speaking
venue.”
Well, there you have it. Even if the government allows the
Canadians in – and I’ll be the first to take to the streets if they’re barred –
the bigots of the left will do their best to ensure no one can hear them. I ask
you: who are the real fascists here?
Shouting people down is something the far left has a lot of
practice at. They do it all the time in the US, Britain and even Australia. You
can hear it on one of the audio clips played on today’s Morning Report,
in which shrieking protesters try to prevent Southern being heard.
In the US, ironically, the Berkeley campus of the University
of California, which was the birthplace of the radical student free-speech
movement in the 1960s, is now synonymous with the practice of no-platforming –
the very antithesis of free speech. Just as ironically, some of the speakers
recently turned back at British airports had been engaged to deliver addresses
at Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park, where traditionally all comers have been
allowed.
Let’s assume for a moment, as a purely hypothetical
exercise, that Morse’s shrill hyperbole is even remotely accurate, and that
Southern and Molyneux would come here with the aim of inflaming local racists.
I could only say good luck with that, because New Zealand is by world standards
a remarkably tolerant and moderate society, and stolidly resistant to
inflammation by extremists of any stripe.
Perhaps even more importantly, it’s a robust democracy that
is perfectly capable of being exposed to rancid opinions without being swayed.
I always come back to that wonderful line from Milton’s Areopagitica:
“Let Truth and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a
free and open encounter?”
Here, in a way, is the essence of the issue. It all comes
down to trust and control. Leftist fanatics like Morse don’t trust people to
make their own sensible judgments, so they want to control what we hear and
read. If we value free speech and representative democracy, we can't let them.
Footnote 1: Paul Spoonley disappoints
I was saddened to hear Massey
University professor Paul Spoonley say on Morning Report that
he wasn’t opposed to the Canadians being denied entry. I respect Spoonley and
have never doubted him when he described himself as a supporter of free speech.
On Morning Report today, however, he added the dreaded “but
…”. Spoonley said he didn’t see free speech being advanced by views that he
described as “hateful and extreme”.
I have two problems with that. The first is the assumption
that the opinions expressed by Southern and Molyneux are hateful and extreme.
That depends entirely on the ideological prism you happen to be looking
through. But more importantly, I believe that the moment we start putting
qualifications around freedom of speech, we’re in trouble. Big time.
What a dismal, shameful day for New Zealand, for democracy and for freedom of speech.
July 6 was the day when extreme left-wing bigotry and intolerance triumphed over the democratic values this country has previously espoused.
The left professes to champion diversity and inclusion, but it has revealed just how selectively it interprets those words. Tolerance of diversity and inclusion applies only to favoured left-wing causes. Mysteriously, it stops short of tolerating any opinion that challenges left-wing orthodoxy.
Statements purporting to justify the cancellation of the proposed Auckland speaking engagement by the Canadian “alt-right” commentators Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux are breathtaking in their disregard for democratic principles.
I wonder, what did Auckland do to deserve Phil Goff? His creepy predecessor, the adulterous Len Brown, suddenly looks almost likeable by comparison.
Goff, who has passed himself off for years as a genuine liberal, now stands exposed as just another doctrinaire leftist who wants to control the public conversation. His credibility rating has sunk to zero.
His justification for barring Southern and Molyneux from speaking at Auckland Council-owned venues – that he doesn’t want to “stir up religious or ethnic tensions” – is a sanctimonious copout. It’s a capitulation to fringe extremists like Valerie Morse. It sends a signal that all the extreme left has to do in future to deny a platform to people it doesn’t like is to threaten violent disruption.
At times like this we expect our political leaders to stand up for the right to free speech, because it’s a fundamental tenet of liberal democracy. It’s not overstating things to say that Goff has betrayed us all.
As for Morse, I wonder if she suffers from some sort of personality disorder. She certainly seems blind to the contradictions in her own behaviour.
She purports to represent an organisation called Auckland Peace Action, but seven years ago she was identified as one of the Urewera 18 – a pathetic bunch of pretend urban terrorists who allegedly threw Molotov cocktails around and fired semi-automatic weapons at training camps in the bush.
Morse avoided conviction after the Supreme Court ruled that the police had gathered evidence illegally, but according to the evidence she was filmed holding a Molotov cocktail and had a pistol tucked into her trousers. Very peaceable.
More to the point, Morse was arrested for burning a New Zealand flag in a protest gesture at an Anzac Day service in Wellington in 2007. It was an act that outraged many New Zealanders, but her conviction for offensive behaviour was overturned by the Supreme Court.
Much as I despise Morse and her ilk, I believe the Supreme Court got it right. Freedom of expression quite properly allows New Zealanders to engage in acts that other people find deeply objectionable.
The irony is that having benefited from the right to freedom of expression on that occasion, Morse now insists on denying it to others. I don’t think there’s a word in the English language that captures the scale of her hypocrisy.
Karl du Fresne blogs at karldufresne.blogspot.co.nz.
2 comments:
Dangerous and Hate Speech only applies to those who are Conservative. The neo Marxist left wing demonstrations, its rioting, the force, and pressure used to prevent attendance at Right Wing Public Meetings is encouraged. We are to all intent and purpose, firmly into an era dominated by the radical left. With a New Zealand totally bereft of a forceful active fundamentally operating right wing opposition.
That is position which now threatens our democracy and Western Civilisation as a whole. It is a resurrection of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Chairman Mao’s present day China whereby all opposition is subservient to the left i.e. Neo Marxism.
The dictatorial socialist insolence of Mayor Goff to arbitrary state that “He” will not allow two speakers to exercise a constitutional right to publically address an audience in our major city; is an insult to the citizens and shows that the ideology of Communism is alive and well.
One really cannot be surprised at this radical statement by a failed political left winger, seeing that the major forum the United Nations with its total bias and socialist leanings for decades has been a feature of their existence. A case in point being its thinly disguised anti-Semitism.
Let us hope that President Trump in his next term of office withdraws the U.S. contribution to the U.N. which might, give our politicians food for thought regarding our foreign aid to such organisations as the Palestine Authority in terrorist held Gaza.
Valerie Morse has the right to speak against the two Canadians, and so has Mr Goff (but not as the Mayor of a City) but neither of them have the right to stop these speakers from expressing their views.
The alternative is a return to arbitrary rule by an unelected Parliament; which incidentally, we are half way to having under the present MMP system.
A case of being first again New Zealand!
Brian
It is amazing more than surprising that Karl was unaware of Molyneux,[ not so much Southern].Molyneux has made countless video discussions and lectures outlining evidential positions on maybe too much,but especially on the evidence of the harm and chaos at open borders has brought to West Europe, and the UK.
And this "As one example of their extreme, “alternative” positions, RNZ cited Southern’s statement that there are “only two genders”. It’s an indication of how totally the so-called progressives have seized control of the public conversation that Southern could be held up as a pariah for expressing an opinion that’s shared by many New Zealanders – possibly even a majority –"
What? Whartt?
Its an >Opinion< that there are only to human genders . Good grief when did those billions of years of evolution disappear into fantasy.
Post a Comment