Australia Drops Opportunity to Scale Back Hate Speech Laws


Australia this week provides another reminder that America's First Amendment is in a league of its own, even among Western first world countries. In July, Jerry Tuccille took note of an order by the courts in Australia imposing a five-year ban prohibiting media outlets from reporting on a corruption case involving them and three other countries (Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia). Wikileaks published the order.
This censorship is not the only area where Australia limits free speech. The government had been considering changes to a part of the country's Racial Discrimination Act that criminalizes hate speech. But on Tuesday, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced he was abandoning the changes in order to preserve "national unity."
The hate speech component of the law falls under 18C, making it a crime to publicly say things that "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people" on the basis of their race, color, nationality, or ethnic origin.
According to The Australian, leaders had proposed changing the law to remove "offend," "insult," and "humiliate" from the list, add a measure about "vilification" instead, and broaden exemptions to the law. The reason the change has been abandoned, Abbott said, is because it's a distraction from counterterrorism efforts. By which, I think he means he's afraid that not punishing bigoted speech will cause minorities to turn into terrorists in response, which is a pretty horrible way of looking at your citizenry. Via The Australian:
Mr Abbott, explaining his decision to dump the election commitment to amend the act, said: "When it comes to counter-terrorism, everyone needs to be part of Team Australia. The government's perfectly-reasonable-under-different-circumstances attempt to amend section 18C has become a complication that we just don't need and we're not going to proceed with."
The government's libertarian approach to racial discrimination laws angered ethnic minorities including Jewish, Arabic, Islamic, Greek, Chinese and Armenian community representatives.
Bill Shorten accused the government of using national security as "a cover" to abandon his "reckless" reforms to racial discrimination laws.
"Giving Australians the right to be bigots was always destructive action; there is no right to be a bigot in this country," the Opposition Leader said.
Censoring what people say doesn't cause people to be more or less bigoted, obviously, but it's a good reminder of the many, many people who think rights are actually privileges that are handed out by the government and not things that restrict the power of government over the individual.
Note the reference to potential changes in the law being described as "libertarian." Libertarian Australian Senator David Leyonhjelm wrote an opinion piece in The Australian (paywalled) criticizing the failure to follow through with the changes:
Laws limiting racist speech are not really about speech at all, but are intended to prevent unacceptable thoughts. To believe our thoughts can be regulated by restricting our speech is delusional. No law will stop people from thinking things we disagree with, and banning their expression will only deny civilised public debate and encourage the use of non-traditional media.
The best way to combat opinions you don't like is to have them debated, not stowed in some shady corner of the internet or taken into the courtroom.
I am very disappointed that the government has dropped its plan to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act under the guise of national unity. If we want to live in a free society, we should take the advice of Chopper Read and harden up. There are many pressing issues for our governments and courts, but the question of who has had their feelings hurt is not one of them.
Leyonhjelm also had comments about Australia's own efforts to collect metadata about citizens' online activities and censorship of journalists in the guise of protecting national security. How familiar! Watch this blog for an interview with Leyonhjelm, likely sometime next week.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Aren't their courts presided over by an actual kangaroo?
Just their military courts, and yes he's a captain
That's a damned lie. Captain Kangaroo is as American as it gets. He saved my ass in 'Nam.
Now that is one way of using the WOT I would not have guessed, but of course war is the health of the state in many ways.
Now that is one way of using the WOT I would not have guessed, but of course war is the health of the state in many ways.
"The hate speech component of the law falls under 18C, making it a crime to publicly say things that "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people" on the basis of their race, color, nationality, or ethnic origin."
Two questions: How does this ever pass anywhere? What kind of sheep would be okay with this passing?
How different is it than our wonderful laws like the CRA and various successors? That lesbian couple in NM were, at worst, offended based on protected category E
The wedding photographer could have insulted them before/while/after doing the job?
I wonder what the quality of product you get back from someone who doesn't want to serve you...
If I were a coerced photographer there is a good chance that the pictures you got back from me would be nothing but cat brains and brown eyes.
First current CRA court interpretations have taken years of slow erosion of rights to get to where we are and second the CRA is far more cloak and dagger then the blatant censorship that this law appears to be.
Have you ever spoken with someone under the age of 30? I had a girl get really mad at me the other day for describing someone as "half-black." (full disclosure, I'm 27...)
That's why I always describe Obama as "our first half-white president".
I find it amusing how much of the PC left seems to subscribe to the one drop rule.
Just don't say 3/5ths
half black would actually be 4/5.
Like they are even that historically aware.
I can't keep up with the appropriate terminology anymore! If black is ok, then why isn't half black??? I'm half Irish, and no one gets mad when I say that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Because "half-black" has always been code for "not white". It was derogatory, not observational. I have no idea what it will take to have certain words/phrases fully shed their historical context.
The girl I was describing described herself as half black. Is it like the N word now where only they are allowed to use it or something?
True. But even so that seems like such a fringe group of people, most people could give two shits(I'm 23).
hyperbole!
I'm younger therefore I more in-tune to my generation, you may as well be a stupid generation y'er.
Well the FIRST time I voted for Obama...
I wasn't even able to vote in that election. Just stop your showing your age. We already know your a racist, don't be the guy whose best friend is black so you feel your entitled to spout whatever you want.
I think we need a poll to settle this
Tuccille's first name is Jerry? Yuck.
This from a guy whose middle name is of?
It used to be danger, until I found out I was down a kidney.
You know when you get a kidney transplant they just leave the old one in there? Some people are walking around with three kidneys!
Greedy bastards.
Jerome, actually. And he's our beloved 2chili's father.
Apparently the only thing stopping him from putting people in jail for their thoughts is the absence of mind-reading technology.
There is no right to be a bigot, and anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot. You bigots enjoy your bigot camp.
The Concentration Camp of Tolerance?
"there is no right to be a bigot in this country"
Someone needs to explain to Mr. Opposition Leader that even if you put a bigot in prison, that doesn't magically transform him into a non-bigot. Natural rights. How do they work?
"*Giving* Australians the right to be bigots was always destructive action" [emphasis added]
All rights flow from the State. This is what 'Tony' actually believes.
I wish he were here right now. I want to tell him that global warming is a socialist abortion hoax and watch his head explode!
FUCK TONY!
Repealing these laws will turn Australians into? into? Americans!
Did you know for a brief period during the 70's their accepted national anthem was switched from Waltzing Matilda to Staying Alive? True story.
Wouldn't a Men at Work song be more appropriate?
It was the 70's.
ACDC?
Let me walk everyone through this. They moved from waltzing to disco.
Woudn't a swing band be a more appropriate jump?
Shouldn't you be wearing the bucket?
Crossing Australia off my list of countries to escape to I guess.
My list has recently been whittled down to the Moon and Middle Earth.
I actually am considering New Zealand.
I'm just hoping that someone out there is secretly building up Galt's Gulch.
You can move to my Moon base if you want!
Works for me. Where do I get tickets?
In my basement. wear latex
New Zealand is going to get rid of presumption of innocence for those accused of rape.
Peru. Go to Peru, then the Honduras ZEDE.
And right before my New Zealand rapecation! 🙁
Abbot has been awesome in budget and other stuff but he's being a total bitch here. Australia is stupid.
The hate speech component of the law falls under 18C, making it a crime to publicly say things that "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people" on the basis of their race, color, nationality, or ethnic origin... leaders had proposed changing the law to remove "offend," "insult," and "humiliate" from the list
I'm actually glad they failed to get "offend", "insult" and "humiliate" removed from the statute, thus sparing the word "intimidate" from being bastardized to mean "offend", "insult" and "humiliate" in the future.