Australian Free Speech Issues

[Cesario]

@StrangeBird

This is more about social restrictions on speech than legal restrictions, but…

I am an Australian, and most of my knowledge about the US comes from different forms of media. I have always assumed that people in the US must be really relaxed about saying what they want - after all free speech seems to be something they are really proud of.

I was completely shocked several years ago when the Dixie Chicks criticised then president Bush and received death threats. :eek:

I cannot imagine that happening in Australia - you can slag off whatever politician you like. People might think you’re a tool for doing so, but no-one would suggest you shouldn’t say things like that.

I’m not saying it negates any differences in legislation - it’s just fascinating that it seems like there are things you can’t say in America (because of social pressure) that are completely fine in Australia.

It makes more sense when you consider that said death threats are also a form of speech.

@bannerrefugee

This is a laughable comparison. You don’t know anything about contemporary AU politics and culture if you think that the government and people of Au have a human rights philosophy similar in any meaningful way to those two countries.

I don’t think you read that right. It’s the ways things are different that concern me. It’s like how Huxley, found his own Brave New World a more frightening possibility than Orwell’s 1984. The two dystpoias are as different as could be imagined, but both were undesirable worlds and neither author would want to live in either of them.

@bannerrefugee

Additionally it is ridiculous to imply Australians are unable or unwilling to effect political change.

Actually, that implication here is right out condescending.

I couldn’t advocate for the political changes important to me. I can do that here in the United States. Even though here there are a lot of voices trying to shout me down, my right to advocate for my causes is protected. I have no such right over there, and my cause is sufficiently unpopular that your government does not protect anyone’s right to advocate said cause.

Think of the most disgusting, unpopular position that you can. If you really believe in free speech, that means you want to allow people to advocate for that position. If you don’t think people should be allowed to advocate for that position, you don’t believe in free speech. It is by that standard that I judge whether someone believes in free speech as a concept or not. I do believe in free speech.

@sisu

Look the USA has very similair censorship laws to Australia. The difference is mainly around some of the hate stuff that is about it.

You censor just as much as we do. There is nothing I can think of that you can buy in the states that you can’t buy in Australia, guns and soem video games being the exception. [not all guns just the stupid ones].

This reflects a lack of imagination more than anything else, and is itself a symptom of the censorship. I can write some text in this box that will make you a criminal in Australia for posessing (being in an internet temp file on your computer counts as posession), but which is perfectly legal in the United States.

@sisu

Compulsary voting is a good thing IMO, I rather like our system a lot more then yours. What is this I want the freedom to not vote, so you want the freedom to not have your vote heard?

I think we might be dealing with a disconnect between our definitions, so I’ll ask this question. Are you allowed to turn in a blank ballot and satisfy your requirement to vote? Or do you have to support one or more of the candidates who made it onto the ballot even if the policies of every one of them disgusts you? That’s what I would think this disconnect is about.

@sisu

Oh and the crack about government approved, we vote them in and we can vote them out. I am not government approved, I support Sea Shepherd etc and that is not a government approved position, so stick that up ya jumper.

They most certainly are government approved. The fact that your candidates aren’t in the majority doesn’t mean they aren’t picked out as among the acceptable positions that you have to choose from.

@sisu

We do not silence people with different opinions, lets look at the racist angle for a moment. You can be a racist and we even had a racist pollie get into parliament on a racist agenda but you cannot go out on the streets and say we should go out and commit crimes against said people.

If he got into parlament, his wasn’t a fringe position the government would have felt like censoring in the first place. Try to imagine a genuine fringe position instead.

@sisu

This is the essence of our hate laws, it does make us more civilised. You judge how civilised a country is by how it treats it’s children and most disadvantaged people.

It’s a good standard. Unfortunately, by that standard, I haven’t seen any genuinely civilized countries out there.

@sisu

Typical condescending crap from a country that has more problems than Australia. I have always stuck up the USA but now i can see how I might just stop it if this is typical of the population.

Because that isn’t condescending at all… :rolleyes:

@Cicero

I must be living in a different world. Not once have I heard anyone in Australia comment on this proposed censorship, nor obviously be concerned about it.

I would have no problem with censorship on kiddy porn or such

Then you will love australia, since their stance on kiddy porn is that it’s illegal to even describe what kiddy porn would contain.