Facebook Instagram Twitter Youtube
    Latest

    Personal Liberty

    Home Personal Liberty Page 10

    Section 51(xxvi). Repeal. Rescind. Delete!

    By
    Kenelm Tonkin
    -
    0
    zxc

    By crikey, I’m a little bothered we’re always at sea politically.

    The Left is pounding us with wave after relentless policy wave.

    The Liberal Party has drowned, its body face-down, bobbing and drifting. We libertarians, classical liberals and the otherwise centre-right are in danger of the rip sweeping us to sea.

    Things are perilous. Just look at the eddies and currents fatiguing us:

    • Familiar places and landmarks being renamed in costly rebranding programs
    • Activists undermining joyful time spent on Australia Day
    • Oversized government expenditure now exceeding 50% of our entire economy
    • A hundred separate genders yet female athletes and prisoners forced in with biological males
    • Citizens now being denied access to much-loved national parks
    • Flag confusion
    • Victorian bullets in the back
    • Multiple treaties with multiple tribes, a native patchwork of 500 jurisdictions
    • Some kind of republic
    • Locked in your home for hundreds of days
    • 15-Minute cities, free movement lost on the altar of climate alarmism
    • The Voice To Parliament.

    If we continue only to oppose these ideas, as is the conservative instinct, but not counter with our own, we’ll soon lose more freedoms than is already the case.

    We need bold classical liberals and pugnacious libertarians to fiercely propose striking new policies.

    Take the Voice To Parliament as an example.

    … classical liberals cannot support systemic racism.

    But first, here’s a quick primer for our international subscribers. The Voice To Parliament is a government body proposed by referendum to be enshrined in Australia’s Constitution. It’s stated purpose is to recognise Indigenous people as the first inhabitants of Australia and to act as an advisory board for any bills coming through the Federal Parliament which impact Indigenous people. The body would be comprised exclusively of ethnically Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The motivation for the Voice To Parliament is that Indigenous people suffer poorer life chances and that this is the result of British colonial invasion and ongoing occupation. The Voice to Parliament is said to be just one step in a process of Reconciliation, the duration and shape of which is unspecified.

    In short, what’s being proposed is a new third-chamber of the Australian Parliament with a racial-eligibility criterion to participate.

    Yes, it’s as bad as that sounds.

    Think Apartheid.

    Predictably, the Labor Government along with the socialist Australian Greens will vote “Yes.”

    The feckless Liberals are confused and unable to take a view. Their paralysis is painful to witness.

    Their Coalition partner, The Nationals, are deeply-rooted and sure in saying “No” and have weathered the storm of a confused defector.

    Primer over.

    So what do we do?

    First, we vote “No.” We do so because we as classical liberals cannot support systemic racism.

    Good so far but now we must plan to seize the initiative.

    Second, we ask ourselves, “By what power or mechanism can the Labor Government even legislate something as abhorrent as systemic racism?”

    The answer is in the Australian Constitution. Like the United States Constitution, Australia’s has an enumerated list of areas in which a Commonwealth government can legislate.

    It’s section 51.

    Run your finger down that list and you’ll discover subsection 26 furtively trying its best not to draw attention to itself …

    Section 51 (xxvi)
    “The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for
    the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to
    the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws”

    Yes, you read that correctly. The Constitution anticipates that a Federal government may legislate on the basis of race.

    I don’t know about you but I find this abhorrent. What happened to equality before the law? What happened to judging not by the colour of one’s skin but by the content of one’s character? I’m thinking of 1933 Germany, 1970 South Africa, of Rwanda at its most bleak. Why look at people from a racial perspective at all? If we must have legislation, let’s not discriminate by the amount of melanin in the skin!

    So, here’s the front-foot classical liberal in me …

    At the very next electoral opportunity, let’s put a referendum of our own to the people. Let’s rescind section 51(xxvi) from the Constitution!

    In one fell swoop, no Commonwealth Government will ever again be allowed to make laws with respect to race.

    The benefits are:

    • No elevating one ethnic group at the expense of the other
    • No targeting one ethnic group for the purpose of disadvantaging them
    • No costly Department of Indigenous Affairs and the countless agencies which grift off it
    • The Federal Government has one less legislative jurisdiction, has its wings slightly clipped
    • With the money saved, we can repay at least some of the suffocating debt
    • Indigenous communities will be treated like all others and so weaned off the teat of the state. Same opportunities. Same laws.
    • Indigenous communities stuck in a cycle of inter-generational welfare receipt will learn self-reliance quickly.

    It has a lot to recommend it.

    So rather than simply react to a Leftist proposal and not respond in kind, let’s advocate a bolder, muscular kind of original liberalism, of classical liberalism, of libertarianism.

    End systemic racism. Abolish s51(xxvi)!

    Then we’ll never have race-based laws again.

    GRAPHIC: Live, fatal organ extraction exposed

    By
    Fiona Hui
    -
    0
    doc

    Prepare yourself.

    This interview is hard for sun-soaked Australians to comprehend.

    It’s a topic most of our politicians avoid. It’s too troubling. It opens a Pandora’s Box of questions, about humanity, ethics, complex interconnections, human rights, our future, and sickening expediency beyond our imagination.

    So, before the interview, Liberty Itch will step you through a quick, summarising primer.

    There is credible evidence that Australia’s #1 trading partner, the People’s Republic of China, runs the world’s largest forced organ harvesting business.

    Australia doesn’t simply buy electronics, steel and machinery from China but, critics assert, the Communist Chinese Party does a roaring trade in human hearts, lungs and kidneys, treated as commodities like any other. It’s a lucrative, bloody business.

    https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/u2bUusvh3c0?rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0&enablejsapi=0

    The China Tribunal, a London-based non-government tribunal which investigated claims of forced human organ harvesting chaired by former lead prosecutor of the Slobodan Milošević trial, Sir Geoffrey Nice KC, has made some shocking findings.

    This will give you a feeling for those findings:

    https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/naJFMfDv3Tc?start=425s&rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0&enablejsapi=0

    Its damning final judgment claimed there are over 1.5 million people currently detained in Chinese prison camps, many of them are being brutally killed or operated on, alive, to provide organs for the $1 billion transplant industry.

    $1 billion! That’s the size of Australia’s wine exports to China, when the communists aren’t interfering with free trade. This is the scale of the ghoulish business.

    If you think the issue of Beijing’s organ trafficking is a far-away problem overseas, you are mistaken. It’s on our doorstep. It’s here.

    The China Tribunal discovered a few Australians in the medical profession linked to a Sydney hospital were denying organs were sourced through coercion and human rights abuses.

    Further, the Australian reported contentious, CCP-propagandist white-washing of forced harvesting by a former Griffith University academic, Campbell Fraser, who had a history of cooperative association with CCP mouthpiece, China Daily.

    Campbell Fraser. Griffith University barred him from trips to China.

    Further again, Australia’s SBS reported a complicated fracas between medical practitioners at Westmead Hospital. In that report, Dr Chapman, a staunch defender of Chinese Communist Party organ harvesting practices, had in earlier years reported another physician allegedly being told by a patient of Chinese origin, “I cannot come in for dialysis tomorrow. I have to fly tonight because they are shooting my donor tomorrow.”

    Though obviously the Australian and SBS are reputable sources, Liberty Itch wanted to speak directly with other investigators with expertise in China’s organ harvesting practices.

    The following interview is with David Matas CM.

    David Matas CM is an international human rights lawyer based in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. He is co-author with David Kilgour, a former Canadian Secretary of State and Deputy Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons, of Bloody Harvest: The Killing of Falun Gong for their Organs, 2009 and co-editor with Torsten Trey of State Organs: Transplant Abuse in China, 2012. David is a co-founder with David Kilgour and Ethan Gutmann of the International Coalition to End Transplant Abuse in China, and a member of the Order of Canada.

    David Matas CM. International human rights lawyer, author, researcher and 2010 Nobel Peace Prize nominee.

    <Interview starts>

    LI: Can you give Liberty Itch subscribers a brief overview of the Chinese state’s organ harvesting business? How is it done?

    DM: Prisoners of conscience in arbitrary indefinite detention are systematically blood tested and organ examined. The lists of prisoners with blood types and tissue types are circulated to nearby health practitioners and hospitals. When a patient arrives needing a transplant, the blood and tissue typing is matched with that of a prisoner. The matching prisoner is, in detention, injected with anti-coagulants and immobilisers and then taken to a nearby van where organs are extracted. The extraction kills the prisoner. His or her body is cremated on site. The organ or organs are taken by the van to a nearby hospital or to an airport for transport elsewhere in China.

    LI: What is the scale? Who are the victims and who are the ‘clients’?

    DM: About 100,000 organs a year. The victims are primarily practitioners of the spiritually based set of exercises Falun Gong, also Uyghurs in large numbers, Tibetans and House Christians, mostly Eastern Lightning, in smaller numbers. The clients are transplant tourists, and wealthy or well-connected Chinese.

    LI: Who benefits from the Chinese State’s organ harvesting business?

    DM: The health system benefits financially. The Communist Party benefits through elimination of those it sees as insufficiently Communist.

    LI: You recently visited Australia, late last year, and have gone to Canberra to present the issue of Beijing’s Illegal Organ Trafficking to our elected representatives in the Federal Parliament. What was the response?

    DM: There has been significant concern in the Parliament of Australia about organ transplant abuse in China. There have been many petitions in the Parliament of Australia, both in the House of Representatives and the Senate, addressing Falun Gong and organ harvesting, starting in 2006 when the report that I wrote with David Kilgour first came out and continuing to this year. The Parliament, it is safe to say, is well-informed of the abuse and has showed considerable concern about the abuse.

    However, the response from the individual elected representatives varied, depending on the representative with whom I met. I would suggest contacting these representatives directly for their response.

    LI: What more should the Australian Government do to tackle this crime?

    DM: These are 5 suggestions to the Australian government in summary.

    1) Improve the Australian Senate procedures. There are several Parliaments around the world which have, through motions or resolutions, condemned the mass killing in China of prisoners of conscience for their organs and called for Government action to avoid complicity in those killings. Australia should follow suit.

    2) Adopt mandatory reporting whereby medical professionals have an obligation to report, to an appropriate registry or authority, any knowledge or reasonable suspicion that a person under their care has received a commercial transplant or one sourced from a non-consenting donor, be that in Australia or overseas;

    3) Implement extraterritorial legislation. The current Australia’s Criminal Code does not explicitly prohibit organ trafficking. The government has accepted the recommendation to amend it but no amendments have been proposed in reality. As an alternative, private Members and Senators could introduce amendments to prohibit organ trafficking;

    4) Become a state party to the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and join other nations in a collective effort to combat foreign organ transplant abuse;

    5) One last suggestion I would make is the constitution of a friends of Falun Gong Parliamentary group. Australian Parliamentarians, through the many petitions they have presented to Parliament, as well as through the Sub Committee report, and statements they have made outside Parliament, have shown an understanding of the issue of the mass killing.

    You can see the full text of my suggestions here.

    <Interview ends>

    Liberty Itch urges the Albanese Government to take leadership to protect the most vulnerable members of our community. It was promised to us that Australia will ‘cooperate where we can, disagree where we must’ with China.

    This is an area that we ‘disagree where we must’ and immediate actions need to be taken.

    There’s more you can do:

    The International Coalition to End Transplant Abuse in China (ETAC) has an Australian chapter that works on a range of initiatives. Apart from legislation change, there is also a need for Australian universities, hospitals and transplant associated organisations to undertake due diligence in their interactions with China in the areas of transplant medicine, research and training.

    It’s important that our medical professionals and academics are not unknowingly aiding and abetting China in its illegal organ trafficking practices.

    An Open Letter To Mr. Alexander Downer

    By
    Kenelm Tonkin
    -
    0
    Alexander Downer

    This open letter assumes the reader has also read the Australian Financial Review column by Alexander Downer dated 4 Dec 2022 found here . Start there and follow with this Open Letter.

    27 January 2023

    Dear Mr. Downer,

    I read your Australian Financial Review column dated 4 December 2022 with great interest.

    As a former State and Federal Executive member of the Liberal Party, as a former Young Liberal of the Year and participant in 72 pre-selections, I agree with much of what you wrote.

    The fact that the Liberal Party has lost its philosophical mooring and is now drifting wherever the political currents take it was the very reason I left and joined the Liberal Democrats in South Australia.

    They stand for fiscal restraint, individual freedom, rule of law, freedom of speech, entrepreneurialism, freedom of worship, free trade, equality before the law, innovation and science, the very things the Liberal Party have abandoned and seem unable to clearly articulate.

    As an example of just how unable even Liberal Party senators have become to hold true and firm to these beliefs, see here Senator Andrew Bragg from NSW on ABC’s Q&A:

    https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/q0g_GGq5cc4?rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0&enablejsapi=0

    It’s not only the Liberal Democrats who provide fresh competition. There are good people in other parties who share these values but do not see the Liberal Party as their natural home any longer.

    Nowhere was the Liberal Party’s drift more evident than during covid overreach. And it’s with that in mind that I turn to your column.

    You wrote, “In South Australia, the public was on the whole supportive of the state government’s termination of traditional civil liberties.”

    As you know, public opinion can be manufactured. When you say leadership was required rather than managerialism, nowhere was that needed more than during covid.

    You wrote further, “The values of selfless individualism and individual freedom and responsibility are timeless. The Liberal Party shouldn’t allow them to be cast as anachronistic.”

    You can see my emphasis in both these quotes.

    I’d therefore like to ask you a simple question in an effort to reconcile those two quotes from your column:

    Do you agree it was a mistake for the recent SA Liberal Government to have terminated traditional civil liberties at the expense of our timeless value of individual freedom?

    This open letter is published on Liberty Itch, which boasts current and past MPs as well as current party leaders and activists as subscribers.

    I and my readers await your reply.

    Yours respectfully,

    Kenelm Tonkin
    Editor
    Liberty Itch

    22 Patriotic Things To Do On Australia Day

    By
    Kenelm Tonkin
    -
    0

    Here is your definitive list of Australia Day must-dos. Any one of these makes you a thoughtful Aussie. Do all 22 and you’ll end up with an Order of Australia.

    Here we go …

    1. Start the day with Vegemite on damper and Weet Bix;
    2. Wear eucalypt silvery-green and deep gold clothing. Make an effort with the hues. Lime-green and canary yellow just won’t cut it;
    3. Fly a large Australian flag at home so your neighbours can see it. Bonus points for a huge flag flown proudly atop a permanent flagpole in your front yard;

    Host an Australia Day BBQ at your place;

    Decorate your entire house with dozens of miniature Blue Ensigns;

    Give someone you love a bouquet of native flowers;

    Sizzle all-Aussie beef steaks and burgers with a native bush tomato and mountain pepper berry rub;

    Serve burgers with beetroot and an oversized Queensland pineapple ring. Bonus points for onion and a BBQ poached egg;

    Make an Australian dessert like pavlova, lamingtons, Iced Vovo tart, vanilla slice or fairy bread;

    Recite Mackellar’s My Country aloud before the family. Bonus points for Banjo Paterson’s The Geebung Polo Club done with rhythm and build-up;

    Play a hotly-contested, raucous game of backyard cricket. Bonus points for loud, speculative appealing and protestations when turned down;

    Do anything at the beach. Absolutely anything!

    Tweet your unreserved appreciation and love for Australia;

    Kenelm Tonkin @KenelmTonkin

    I love Australia, its freedoms, its opportunities, its outdoorsmen. I love our individual flair, our explorers, our flinty pioneers & adventurers. That a mere 26 million in a mere 235 yrs have, with sweat, turned this wide, brown land into a beacon, a free & liberal home for all.

    Image

    12:04 AM ∙ Jan 26, 2023

    Recite the Oath of Allegiance even as a lifelong citizen;

    Share with family and friends what you love about Australia;

    Play Slim Dusty, Midnight Oil or Percy Grainger, as your taste dictates. Just make sure the music is Australian;

    Self-consciously use old Australian dialect words. Bonus points for,

    “You’re bonzer, cobber. It’s the Pom who’s gone troppo, a fair dinkum drongo. What a galah!”

    Fly the flag from your car and drive around your neighbourhood;

    Photograph a beautiful Australian scene and share on social media;

    Sing loudly and without any hint of self-consciousness any of the following: I Am Australian, I Still Call Australia Home, Waltzing Matilda or Advance Australia Fair. Bonus points for leading a group to sing all of them with you;

    Debate who is Australia’s greatest author; and

    Prepare and deliver a short summary of the life and adventures of an Australian explorer.

    FREEDOM! The Daughter of Davos Resigns.

    By
    Kenelm Tonkin
    -
    0

    Two extraordinary things happened yesterday.

    First, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced her resignation effective, at the latest, early in February 2023. (Yes, New Zealanders need to endure her for a few weeks more!)

    Second, I put out this short tweet yesterday together with a video of the Prime Minister, and it went viral. In a mere 180 minutes, it was seen by 67,400 people and was still swishing around the globe as I wrote this. After 8 hours, 165,000+!

    You have to ask ‘WHY?’

    https://twitter.com/KenelmTonkin/status/1615875921638219778?s=20

    Jacinda Ardern set a couple of records. She was the youngest female prime minister ever in 2017. Further, she gave birth whilst in office.

    Of course, neither of these have anything to do with political achievement.

    To be fair, we can probably agree that Jacinda Ardern is expressive.

    Some went so far as to say she showed great empathy.

    I think it more accurate to say any apparent empathy was self-consciously dispensed and exclusively to beneficiaries of her bias.

    Any praise for expressiveness and empathy needs much closer scrutiny. It’s what she expresses that so confounds civil libertarians like you and me. And, if you don’t mind me expressing myself here dear reader, she showed a distinct lack of empathy for many during covid lockdowns, victims of which are generations not yet born as you’ll see. So read on.

    Instead, what we observed was a smiling socialist, a Daughter of Davos, instinct over intellect, all feeling and no financial finesse. In short, she was a classical liberal’s nightmare.

    Just look at the legacy she leaves after six reckless years in office:

    • Frequent meddling with the free market. The results: distortions in housing prices and a generation of first home buyers shut-out of their ownership aspirations;
    • A backlash against over-zealous covid restrictions and loss of personal freedoms, including creating a medical-apartheid defined by vaccination-status. See the video tweet above;
    • Conscientious objectors and the vaccine-hesitant were shunned socially, denied mobility, prevented from earning a living and targeted by government in ways the Stasi would have relished in Soviet-era East Germany;
    • Consequential increasing crime rates in the island nation;
    • Inflation sitting at 7.2%;
    • Food prices spiking 8.3% compared with the same time a year earlier;
    • Successive interest rate increases from New Zealand’s central bank;
    • A monstrous public debt! When she took office, the public debt was approximately $60 billion USD. Projections are that, based on all data currently available reflecting the decisions of her government, that the national debt will balloon to $151 billion USD by 2027. If the figure proves higher or lower than that, it will be the result of her successor’s policies, but you can see the economic vandalism on her watch. Put it this way, she led a government which racked-up triple the debt of all previous New Zealand governments combined. She went way over the credit card limit and left someone else to pick up the bill. Funny, right?;
    • For a country with a population the size of Boston, it will take three generations at least to bring that debt to heel. We are talking inter-generational theft which will crush Zoomer Kiwis’ standard of living, their children and their grandchildren. That is to say, on the day after you, I and Jacinda Ardern meet our Lord and Maker, New Zealanders will be dealing with the Ardern Economic Catastrophe for another two generations thereafter;
    • Many of them will flee New Zealand and hollow this beautiful jewel of the South Pacific. They have been emigrating anyway, mainly to Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States;
    • A strategic flirtation with the Chinese Communist Party. Her Labour Party has long shunned our liberal democratic ally, America. It was a natural progression from that to openly calling for greater integration with the communists, a weak-kneed strategy in favour of firebrand authoritarianism with a chequebook over the cleansing-balm of liberty;
    • Consistent with that predisposition towards authoritarianism, civil liberties in New Zealand were shattered under her Governments. Emergency powers poised to be invoked again at any time are left in place;
    • Chinese Communist Party infiltration of New Zealand consulates and banks;
    • She openly lied about the efficacy of covid vaccines. “If you take the vaccine, you’ll still get covid but you won’t get sick and you won’t die” was a claim she made during the height of an hysteria of her own making, and contradicted by the science and the manufacturer. Don’t believe me? Watch this …

      https://twitter.com/KenelmTonkin/status/1616211090882592768?s=20


    • More government restrictions on the access and use of water;
    • Crushing regulations on agricultural emissions;
    • Further shifting of the goal posts with hate speech laws without any safeguards as to who adjudicates what ‘hate speech’ actually is.

    The adulation and applause had faded about a year ago. The shadowy World Economic Forum’s simping seemed impossibly distant now. Jacinda Ardern had to face the people of New Zealand imminently and the prospects weren’t promising.

    With polling numbers in decline and the sparkle now tarnished, the Prime Minister did what all faithful authoritarians and central-planners do when their number is up. She spoke sweetly, smiled nervously, then scurried to the nearest exit hoping that the rule of law she undermined holds firm for her.

    I was shocked my tweet went viral. I shouldn’t have been. Countless everyday people across the West, people like you and I, have had a gutful.

    The Daughter of Davos was a symbol of all that has gone wrong over the last 3 years. So of course you cheered her departure.

    I don’t think we’ll have to wait long before she re-emerges with an ostentatious job title and global brief somewhere in the world. “Poverty Ambassador-At-Large, World Economic Forum”, on $820,000 per annum, Davos chalet and chauffeur the obligatory perks on top sounds about right.

    And when that happens, you and I can both smile knowingly that at least here she won’t have harmed anyone further. On her departure from the Land of the Long White Cloud, she will increase the average IQ of New Zealand, and not decrease that of the World Economic Forum.

    Pardon me if I shed not a solitary tear.

    BREAKING: Violent CCP thug convicted in NSW

    By
    Fiona Hui
    -
    0
    Ted Hui

    This week, a pro-Beijing self-described ‘spontaneous patriot’ was successfully convicted in a Sydney court of criminal intimidation.

    Last August 2022, prominent pro-democracy activist and former Hong-Kong Legislative Councillor, Ted Hui, suffered a politically driven assault and intimidation in Sydney.

    Chinese Communist Party supporter, Billy Kwok, influenced by the Chinese government’s propagandist apps WeChat and Weibo, was not happy with Mr. Hui’s pro-democracy advocacy. So, he decided to take matters into his own hands and used violence to handle a political difference of opinion.

    The police officially charged Mr. Kwok in September 2022, but the case was delayed due to ‘mental health’ grounds.

    These delays were overcome and, this week, a Sydney court found him guilty on two counts of criminal intimidation, handing-down both a community service order of 12 months and a $500 fine.

    On hearing the verdict, Mr. Hui said, “This successful prosecution sends two important messages to the community. Firstly, all people in Australia have the right to express their political views freely. This must be respected.”

    “Secondly, pro-Beijing people need to understand that they cannot use violence against any person, just because they have a different political persuasion. The rule of law underpins the way Australian society is governed”, he continued.

    Liberty Itch praises Mr. Hui for his courage and tenacity in defending Australian free speech and fighting for democracy in Hong Kong.

    ‘All Great Change Begins at the Dinner Table’

    By
    Bob Day
    -
    0
    Leyonhjelm and Day

    Last week, I commented on how spooky George Orwell’s predictions in his dystopian novel 1984 have become – a growing state, growing authoritarianism, the rise of rent-seekers and how our fellow citizens are being manipulated.

    So, let’s talk more about our fellow citizens, what’s happening with them, and how we can help them to fight back.

    Most people do not follow politics so have no idea
    what is happening around them and to them.

    Often their only source of information is via social media – and who controls that? Those who want more government, more spending, more taxes, more regulation and more control, of course. Facebook, for example is censoring information which urges people to vote “no” in the upcoming referendum on the Voice. As former Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said, “Big Tech is joining with government in trying to force the Voice through without a debate.”

    Former Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson said recently, “We live in an age of astonishing disengagement by far too many good citizens in the life of our nation. I suspect that without compulsory voting we’d have up to half the electorate not bothering to vote at all.”

    Disengaging citizens from politics is not accidental. Keeping people in the dark, doing things that turn them off politics – parliament’s Question Time for example, where not only do politicians behave appallingly, but also brazenly claim to be acting ‘in the best interests of the Australian people’, when they are clearly acting in their own interest and the interests of the rent-seeking cartels. It is no wonder people are disillusioned and disengaged.

    As we know, most people do not like confrontation and choose instead to ‘opt out’. They let the world be ruled by ‘those who show up’ as the old saying goes. The problem is that those who show up are not the ‘good citizens’ John Anderson has in mind.

    What will it take to engage people – a catastrophe perhaps?

    Australians are about to be mugged by reality. Higher mortgage rates, power blackouts, food and petrol shortages, price rises, a housing affordability and rental crisis are going to severely test the Albanese government.

    Across the globe there is havoc. Ukraine, Taiwan, an energy crisis, rising interest rates caused by rising inflation, Covid, climate, the Voice, workplace relations changes aka more union power, rising electricity and gas prices. Shakespeare’s ‘dogs of war’ are growling, and Australia will not escape at least some of this havoc.

    Here in Australia, Gillian Triggs, the former president of Australia’s Human Rights Commission received a standing ovation at a (former Greens leader) Bob Brown event, for a speech which included the line, “Sadly, you can say what you like around the kitchen table at home.”

    I prefer the version of former US President Ronald Reagan, in his farewell address following his successful eight-year presidency when he said …

    “All great change begins at the dinner table”.

    In 2015, when former Senator David Leyonhjelm and I were in parliament, we tried to amend Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

    The amendment we proposed in our Racial Discrimination Amendment Bill was relatively modest. It simply removed the highly subjective terms “offend” and “insult” from the Act. Words such as “humiliate” and “intimidate” remained. If the Bill had passed, the original intention of the Racial Discrimination Act would have been restored – freedom of speech and protection against racial discrimination. These two objectives would have been able to co-exist in equilibrium.

    The Coalition blocked our Bill.

    Next week, how our opponents attack classical liberalism by first undermining Christianity.

    INTERVIEW: Life as a Political Asylum Seeker in Australia

    By
    Fiona Hui
    -
    0

    With his face covered in goggles, protective gas mask and yellow hard-hat that symbolised the pro-democracy movement, Eldia was one of the students involved in the 2019 Siege of Polytechnic University in Hong Kong.

    An estimated 1,300 people were detained during the turmoil. Eldia, 21, was among them.

    Although he had taken part in the protest peacefully, he was arrested and ended up with charges of rioting, which would carry a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. Coming from a respectable, educated, middle-class family, Eldia should have had a promising future in Hong Kong, prior to the breakdown of the rule of law in the formerly free and civilised city.

    In a desperate attempt to escape the oppressive Communist Chinese regime, Eldia decided to break his bail agreement and flee to Australia on a visitor visa in 2020.

    Two years on, his future remains uncertain.

    Fearing incarceration upon returning to Hong Kong, he has submitted a protection visa application to the Home Affairs Department to safeguard himself from the world’s most totalitarian government.

    Liberty Itch reached out to the Australia-Hong Kong Link, a non-profit organisation that works to promote the democracy movement in Hong Kong, to gain an insight into Eldia’s life as a political refugee in Australia.

    Despite his young appearance, Eldia exudes a strength of character that belies his age. He has a quiet, unassuming demeanour yet demonstrates an unwavering commitment to advancing the prospects of Hong Kong.

    Here is the interview with Eldia…

    What activities were you engaged in to advance the democracy movement in Hong Kong?

    I attended the demonstrations in Hong Kong on a frequent basis in 2019. I was non-violent the whole time. I took part in the protests, but I did not join the front line. The only thing I did was stay peaceful and helped other young people. I was in the vicinity of Polytechnic University to help students who were trapped in the university campus by hundreds of riot police. I now carry multiple democracy-related ‘criminal charges’. I was charged just for going to a protest, I actually did nothing but to provide moral support to students in need. But the police were charging young people at the scene who were simply wearing a mask.

    Has the democracy movement completely stopped now in Hong Kong?

    I don’t think the democratic movement in Hong Kong has completely stopped, but after the establishment of the Hong Kong ‘National Security Law’, Hong Kong has completely lost freedom of speech. In addition, there are often pre-trial sentences in the courts, which has been a major blow to the democratic movement in Hong Kong.

    Even speaking online, you risk being arrested.

    Are you in touch with other activists in Australia and overseas?

    Being part of a pro-democracy organisation consisting of Hongkongers living in Australia, I feel privileged to be able to express my support for the Hong Kong diaspora and their cultural identity, as well as appreciate the democratic liberties of Australia.

    What is life like as a political asylum seeker in Australia?

    The thought of never being able to return to Hong Kong can be sad and heavy. I never thought that I would be a political refugee with ‘criminal charges’! Typically, Hong Kong students in Australia become skilled migrants, not political refugees who need protection.

    But I feel very lucky to be able to live in Australia because I am free.

    I think daily about the innocent people in Hong Kong facing years in prison. They aren’t forgotten.

    I was already a student studying in Australia, so I have adapted to life here. I feel free, however, I am not allowed to go overseas as per the conditions of my protection visa.

    Is Beijing still after you and do you feel safe?

    I feel relatively safe in Australia because I’m not a public figure, so I haven’t been threatened too much. But make no mistake, I am currently a ‘fugitive’ in the eyes of the CCP Hong Kong Government. Needless to say, I am absent from the relevant court hearings in Hong Kong and worry that it may negatively impact on people around me because of my sensitive identity.

    As we know, the Chinese Government’s tentacles are far and wide in Australia.

    I am therefore staying low-key in supporting Hong Kong democracy movement overseas. Most people I interact with daily don’t know that I am an asylum seeker.

    Where is your family and how do you stay connected with them?

    My family is still in Hong Kong and I’m very worried about their safety. I hope they can leave Hong Kong as soon as possible.

    Now I use anonymous software to communicate with my family and friends.

    Are you still fighting for Hong Kong democracy? If so, how?

    I’ll continue to fight for Hong Kong’s democracy and freedom until Hong Kong is liberated. I know very well that what we are facing is the world’s largest and the most-cruel dictatorship – Communist China. It will not be easy to liberate Hong Kong and it may not even be something that can be seen in my lifetime. But I will still insist on fighting for democracy and freedom, because many people have sacrificed their freedom for it.

    If we give up, their sacrifice will be in vain. Therefore, I often remind myself to tell people in Australia what is happening in Hong Kong as much as possible, and let others know that democracy and freedom should not be taken for granted. Freedom is hard-won and easily lost. We need to continue defending our inalienable rights.

    I intend to remain involved in operations conducted by Australian Hongkongers and joining with those who think similarly. I’m also looking to conduct more outreach activities in the future, for example, setting up a page devoted to my own observations and sharing them.

    How do you build a fulfilling life in Australia going forward?

    I plan to continue my studies and hope that I can make a positive contribution to Australia. I volunteer for the local community and through these volunteer activities, I have a better understanding of the lives of the locals, so that I can be more integrated into Australian life.

    What else would you like the readers of Liberty Itch to know?

    It’s no secret that China is the world’s second largest economy, and Australia cannot avoid economic and trade ties with it. Nevertheless, I plead with the Australian government to balance its desire for high-growth trade with the need to expose human rights abuses in China. And remember, in the last few years, Chinese infiltration and interference has been rampant, putting Australia’s freedom and autonomy in jeopardy. We must remember the people who have borne the brunt of the CCP’s oppression in Hong Kong, East Turkistan, Tibet, Taiwan, and other regions. Australia needs to break its reliance on Chinese trade and quickly diversify its investments.

    Phillip Adams Must Go

    By
    Kenelm Tonkin
    -
    0

    I believe people should be allowed to say what they want.

    Free speech is a human right.

    Should you have to pay for it, though?

    Take yesterday’s reply to Kamahl from taxpayer-funded ABC journalist, Phillip Adams:

    Phillip Adams @PhillipAdams_1

    Clearly, Kamahl, he made you an Honorary White. Whereas one of the most towering political figures of the 20th century was deemed unworthy of Bradman’s approval.

    Kamahl AM @OfficialKamahl

    @PhillipAdams_1 Why do you think Sir Donald Bradman refused to meet Mandela ? Why do you think the greatest ever ‘spotsman’ welcomed me at his home from August 1988 every year, till he left us in 2001? He also left me letters he wrote every year. Why Phillip ? @OfficialKamahl @PhillipAdams_110:47 PM ∙ Dec 26, 2022381Likes53Retweets

    Set aside Mr. Adams’ incorrect claim that Sir Donald Bradman deemed Nelson Mandela unworthy. The opposite is true. They were fond of each other. Mandela regarded Bradman as a hero for his 1972 decision to withdraw Australia from playing South Africa. Bradman sent gifts to Mandela. They corresponded.

    Instead, after Kamahl’s post regarding his positive first-hand experience of Sir Donald, focus on Mr. Adams’ incendiary reply.

    Here’s my question for you, dear reader:

    POLL

    Was Phillip Adams’ “Honorary White” comment to Kamahl racist?

    Yes

    100%

    No

    0%

    13 VOTES · POLL CLOSED

    If you voted ‘yes’, this raises the issue of whether we as a society should be funding such racism. ABC, and therefore Mr. Adams’ salary, is funded by your taxes, after all.

    So, here’s a second question:

    POLL

    Is it ‘systemic’ or ‘institutional’ racism for ABC to continue to employ Mr. Adams?

    Yes

    100%

    No

    0%

    11 VOTES · POLL CLOSED

    If you answered ‘yes’ here and you call yourself a ‘liberal’, a ‘classical liberal’ or a ‘libertarian’, write to the ABC’s Managing Director and your local MP now. Call for Mr. Adams’ termination.

    There is no place for institutional racism in Australia.

    Mr. Adams and his ‘RWNJ’ Slur against an Icon

    By
    Kenelm Tonkin
    -
    0

    Federation University’s Verity Archer discovered a letter written in 1975 by Sir Donald Bradman, the greatest cricket batsman ever to play with an unparalleled average of 99.94, to newly elected Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser.

    The 1975 federal election was undoubtedly a fiercely contested battle. Emotions were high. As any citizen was and is entitled to do, Bradman took a side and wrote:

    “A marvellous victory in which your personal conduct and dignity stood out against the background of arrogance and propaganda indulged in by your opponents.”

    Bradman next makes a prediction, which you would have to say history shows to be prescient:

    “Now you may have to travel a long and difficult road along which your enemies will seek to destroy you.”

    Cricket was a sport for amateurs in The Don’s day. Big money had not yet influenced the sport. Players therefore had to develop a career independent their sporting masters. They were tough men on long, self-funded tours, most unlike some knee-bending virtue-signalers and sandpaper betting-agency grubs you are more familiar with from more recent periods. In Sir Donald’s case, he was an accomplished and successful stockbroker in his own right with an advanced understanding of the regulatory framework of his time. Writing about regulations on capital, Bradman consequently wrote:

    “What the people need are clearly defined rules which they can read and understand so that they can get on with their affairs.”

    Seems fair enough. Sounds like Financial Disclosure Statement (FDS) rules decades later. He then adds:

    “The public must be re-educated to believe that private enterprise is entitled to rewards as long as it obeys fair and reasonable rules laid down by government. Maybe you can influence leaders of the press to a better understanding of this necessity of presentation.”

    There are four points in that paragraph:

    1. Belief in private enterprise. This is straightforward enough of an idea. It’s the basis of our Western, capitalist liberal democracy;
    2. Gaining the rewards of its initiative. Yes. Private enterprise offers goods and services to the public in return for a profit. This is basic economics. Got it;
    3. Some fair and reasonable rules. Well, let’s not have any rules if possible but, if we must, light-touch and easy-the-understand, sure;
    4. Explain this to the media. Not a bad idea for a government to share with the press the direction it would like to take the country. All good.

    What’s to disagree with here?

    Yet, out come the socialists and 1975 ancient historians with an axe to grind:

    Broadcaster Phillip Adams wrote, “Sad. Lost letter from Bradman to Fraser after Whitlam’s dismissal reveals ‘the Don’ to be a RWNJ.”

    Phillip Adams @PhillipAdams_1

    Sad. Lost letter from Bradman to Fraser after Whitlam’s dismissal reveals ‘the Don’ to be a RWNJ9:59 PM ∙ Dec 25, 20222,112Likes259Retweets

    Unaccustomed to shorthand slurs from journalists, I had to find what RWNJ meant: right-wing nut-job, apparently.

    To some boomer-era, battle-axe activists-come-journalists, supporting free-enterprise, light-touch regulation and transparency with the media is radical. Apparently these positions are extreme, wild enough to be branded a right-wing nut-job!

    At what point in Australian progress did free enterprise become a dirty word?

    Or can we say Mr. Adams is the radical one for slandering a long-deceased Australian sporting icon because he believed in free enterprise.

    Or …

    … maybe, just maybe, Mr. Adams has another axe to grind. Perhaps he just hates supporters of Malcolm Fraser over the Political Crisis of 1975.

    All Liberty Itch says in response is:

    • Mr. Fraser won in a record landslide still not bettered today. Mr. Adams is surely not saying the vast majority of Australians including Sir Donald were RWNJs, is he?
    • Mr. Fraser’s successor, Bob Hawke, thought highly enough of Mr. Fraser to appoint him to the Eminent Persons Group to tackle racism in Apartheid-era South Africa. Mr. Adams is surely not saying Bob Hawke was a right-wing nut-job as well for supporting Mr. Fraser, is he?

    Like you, dear reader, I was taught never to speak ill of the dead.

    It seems Mr. Adams wasn’t.

    Long after Mr. Adams meets the Lord, free enterprise and Western liberal democracy will prevail.

    I do hope though that the practice of throwing mud at men long dead and unable to defend their reputations will cease, for Mr. Adams’ sake you understand, dear reader.

    For Mr. Adams’ sake.

    1...9101112Page 10 of 12
    Facebook Instagram Twitter Youtube

    EVEN MORE NEWS

    POPULAR CATEGORY

    © Newsmag WordPress Theme by TagDiv