be published anywhere on the issue of censorship vs. freedom of speech was published
in one of the most unlikely quarters of the world, New Zealand. A correspondent
sent me the text and link to an article titled: “Want
equality? Curtail free speech.” It was written for “Stuff” by a fellow by
the name of Jacob Van De Visser. “Stuff” was described by the correspondent, Lindsay Perigo, as IslmoMarxist.
A New Zealand kiwi’s
impersonation of a golden eagle.
instead of beginning with my own comments, I’ve reproduced the article here so
you can guffaw or be astonished as you will. Mr. Perigo, in his own remarks, wondered
if the piece was tongue-in-cheek satire because it is so blatantly irrational
and hostile to freedom of speech
avalanche of anti-speech articles and the ubiquity of actions that have taken
place before and after Donald Trump’s election (see the Gatestone
column here about American campuses opposing or shutting down speech, except
that which doesn’t violate student “safe
spaces”) in November 2016, together with the tone and content of Stuff’s
other articles, it is wholly consistent with the irrationality of what is
occurring in the West.
The Stuff article begins here.
Zealand to criminalize Islamophobia!
March 23, New Zealand awoke to the horrific news of yet another terrorist attack, this time in London.
deranged individual ploughed a car
into innocent pedestrians and brutally stabbed a police officer to death before
being shot. Five people died, including the attacker. [Italics mine]
Twittersphere was soon abuzz with conjecture and accusation. Who was to blame?
What were the motives?
felt sick as I read comments saying “Islam is to blame” and “it must be another
fact that the attacker was a Muslim is irrelevant. The issue is that
Islamophobia was the first response.
to defend your faith against people who accuse it of being a dangerous and
violent set of ideas. Islam is the religion of peace; anyone who understands
this knows it has no part in the ideology of ISIS.
is a constant fight for other minorities, too.
are a member of the LGBTQAA+ community, you must battle for your rights. You
are forced to choose from just two bathroom choices when often you don’t fit
either. Workplaces often fail to be inclusive to this community, refusing them
places in the boardroom.
are a woman, trans or otherwise, there is no escape from rape culture. On any
given day you might hear a rape joke, or be given a “compliment” such as being
asked for your number by a stranger. The men who make these comments defend
them as harmless, but unwanted harassment can trigger harmful flashbacks to
previous similar incidents or experiences of sexual assault.
misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic hate speech directed at
oppressed groups is damaging to society – and with the rise of Donald Trump’s
brand of politics, it is also being legitimised.
what does this have to do with free speech? And how might things change for the
there is some hope. The Canadian parliament has passed the M-103
motion, which calls on the government to condemn
Islamophobia. It is the silver lining of a dark and depressing cloud, and
it is something I think New Zealand should seek to not only emulate but
Government should look to criminalise not only Islamophobia, but racist
rhetoric and the criticism of feminism and LGBTQAA+ rights.
speech is all well and good, but it should not be defended at the expense of
quells fear and hatred like making it illegal, and if we stop opposing
progressive values then surely the constant fighting will stop too.
Zealand is not a place of tolerance at the moment, but I believe if we curtail
free speech, we will be on the path to a fairer future.
The Stuff article ends here.
No hablar Kiwi, dice el
¿Quieres drogas? ¡Soy tu hombre!
To make a solid argument for
something, one must connect the dots. But the dots in the minds of anti-freedom
of speech advocates are all over the map, unconnected (or disconnected,
assuming there were once brains in which dots could be severed). The mind of an
“anti-fascist” activist visually resembles a Jackson Pollock canvas. It is
not for nothing that militant groups, such as Antifa,
protest what they call “fascism” by adopting the tactics of demonstrably fascist
thugs. It is, again, Soros-Speak. Or, Hillary-Speak.
freedom of speech in order to protect it.” Or:”We must censor the Internet in order to protect
it.” This is George Soros-Speak; in order to create an “open society,” which would
be closed to anyone who values his freedom of speech and freedom, certain types
of speech must suppressed, banned, or punished. In 2011,
prescription for suppressing “offensive” or “hate” speech would be to “shame”
it if not outright obliterate
the First Amendment. Mr. Van De Visser’s Stuff article, in language and in
tone, could well have been written while he snorted up his sleeve, but it could
as well have been a paper submitted for
discussion by The
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), an office
within the OSCE (The Organization for
Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) that claims to be dedicated to democratic
elections, respect for human rights, rule of law, tolerance, and
M13 gangsters react to freedom of speech.
Or are they Maori copycatting M13 criminals?
protect and promote human rights, fundamental freedoms and tolerance and
non-discrimination, as well as to improve and strengthen democratic practices
and institutions. Except that the actual theme of the two-day proceedings had a
lot more to do with countering ‘hate crime,’ criminalizing ‘hate speech,’ and
demonizing ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Islamophobes’ than it did with genuinely
championing the right to believe, live, and speak freely.
coming out of the closet. Having been shrieked down by hysterical Muslims at
Auckland University last year I know just what a menace to free speech they and
their fellow-travellers are. At least the writer of this piece, assuming it
isn’t a satire on Political Correctness, is honest.
difficult to distinguish between satirical writing and serious polemics.