Dutton’s Choice
Peter Dutton has made a big impact as opposition leader. There is a real chance that Airbus Albo will become One Term Albo. No one deserves more to be rapidly transmitted to the dustbin of history. If anyone ever deserved to be memory-holed, it is the current Prime Minister.
But what will Dutton do? Whitlam, Fraser and (arguably) Abbott all demonstrated the chasm between bashing a garbage opponent and governing with (positive) impact. It is important to add “positive” here. By the gods, Gough had impact. He nearly ruined the country. On the positive side of the ledger, Dutton intends to do something (hopefully nothing) about climate change. By pressing the proverbial nuclear button. This would be huge. But the job will not, then, be done. Everywhere there is a mountain of work. Let us just take the creeping authoritianism of government. Surely, next to stopping a world war and killing the pandemic planning industry stone dead, this is THE biggie, for any incoming government. The tyranny of the state grows everywhere, by the day.
Here, the portents are not so good. Recently his three senior senators all voted against – yes, against – an inquiry into Covid governance. This was unspeakable, and let us assume it was done with Dutton’s approval. Certainly, with his knowledge. Same old Liberals, we must conclude. It gets worse.
This was The Spectator’s Alexandra Marshall back in June.
Dutton’s praise of the e-Safety Commissioner spells disaster for the Liberals.
Alexandra referred to “the main event”, which she believes to be:
… mass global censorship of the public conversation.
The Coalition are in serious trouble for appointing the worldwide laughing stock known as ‘Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner’ – the only bureaucrat in our history who has tried to censor content across the whole world.
Her office and her actions sit at odds to every fibre of the party built by Menzies.
‘Julie Inman Grant (the e-Safety Commissioner) is one of the finest public servants in the employment of the Commonwealth of Australia.’
He also said: ‘There is no more important task than making sure we keep children safe in our community and that is true in the real world as much as it is online. These companies operate in a lawless environment and have no regard even for the rule of law in a country like ours.’ And with that, Peter Dutton consigned himself to a footnote in history.
He was led to water, but he will forever stand next to the pool.
Wise advice. And the stakes have only gotten higher since. No only have we had the passage of the Digital ID legislation, but now Albanese wishes to control the internet. And he will have no greater ally in this than Inman-Grant.
Dutton has a choice.
Is he going to be happy just tinkering around the edges, his bucking of the UniParty with real energy reform notwithstanding, or will he go big on the issues that really matter? Righting the sinking ship that is our democracy, and restoring fundamental freedoms and rights to individuals and freely associating groups. This is core Liberal Party business, one would think. Yet all the right words on this issue are spoken by a couple of backbenchers and by the micro freedom parties. Post-Covid Liberals are simply fighting the last war, and not particularly vigorously at that.
The latest moves, tyranny-wise, post the coming of digital ID, are the proposal to stop youngsters from accessing social media, and the war against misinformation and its dis- and mal- siblings via further online restrictions on free speech and beliefs. This is merely the Australian front in a global attempt by the political class to take over the internet, and so reduce it to eunuch status. It is about the only institution left to conquer. The family is gone. The media are gone. The political parties are legacy only, but still there doing what they do. The churches? Woke and corrupt. The Bull Shitten universities? Enough said. The schools? Gone to pot generations ago. But, we still have the internet.
Last week, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the Government hosted events led by Nina Jankowicz and Julie Inman-Grant. Julie, we already know. Jankowicz is a thirty-something American member of the tech-obsessed ruling elite who wants to crush individual freedom. A “global disinformation expert”, no less. So, naturally a good fit with Inman-Grant AND with the ABC. Jankowicz was to be Joe Biden’s misinformation Tsar. That was quickly nipped in the bud. But she still writes books and “tours”.
A better example of canny product placement you couldn’t hope to find. What with the current raft of Labor legislation aimed squarely at internet freedom coming down the pipeline. It all helps to build context. To help to create a moral panic. Create a victim class. It helps if there are “death threats”, as was apparently the case with Inman-Grant.
One of the books under discussion is called How to be a Woman Online.
A new report out today examines ways technology is being exploited to perpetuate gender based violence around the world.
Australia's e-safety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, is featured in it.
She was targetted and trolled after she exercised her professional powers to take action against Elon Musk's social media platform - X.
Ah, right. Exercising her professional powers. So that is what they call trying to determine what people internationally can see and read on the internet. Inman-Grant was rightly called out as a global laughing stock over this.
Another of Nina’s tomes was How to Lose the Information War. Actually, I think Nina knows how to win that war. Here is another version of the weekend of events:
Throughout this entire weekend, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, 𝐉𝐮𝐥𝐢𝐞 𝐈𝐧𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭 and the Former Director of the Disinformation Governance Board, 𝐍𝐢𝐧𝐚 𝐉𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐜𝐳 have been discreetly hosted by the Australian Government and ABC News at Parliament House. They’ve been discussing the impacts of misinformation on social media platforms — 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐚. Nina Jankowicz says she admires our Online Safety Act and the work of Julie Inman Grant because “𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺.”
https://x.com/ausvstheagenda/status/1832584754933518396
Well, she would say that. It is good that the Free Speech Union of Australia is onto this issue, as per the re-tweet here. If ever we needed a super active FSU, it is round about now.
https://freespeechunion.au/
The banning of teenagers from social media is said to be being done to “protect children”. Dystopian Down Under gives a fair summary of the arguments.
If you believe that this is about protecting children, you will most likely also believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden. (Mind you, in these gay times, that isn’t such an outrageous proposition, as Mark Latham has now well and truly discovered).
Despite all of the mealy-mouthed “defence of children” pap from the likes of Michelle Rowland, the real agenda has been laid bare by George Christensen.
The Albanese Government announced a ban on children using social media, but delayed it for two years, likely to set up Digital ID first.
Digital ID is needed for the ban to work, linking identity to social media accounts and ending online anonymity.
This move isn’t about protecting children; it’s about government control over everyone’s online activity.
Both Labor and the Liberals support Digital ID for age verification, showing this is a bipartisan agenda.
Big Tech companies back age verification but admit it will require collecting sensitive personal data like facial scans or government IDs.
Once Digital ID is tied to social media, anonymity will disappear, and every post will be linked to your real identity.
The push for Digital ID is about creating a surveillance state where the government and corporations monitor everything we do online.
The real goal is control and profit, not child safety, driven by corporate media and government interests.
Context is everything. Look at the props being erected around this proposal. The digital ID especially. It will mean that everyone fronting social media will have to prove his age and identity. You see where this is going? Facial recognition? Bill Gates 60,000 satellites across the world will certainly help. The panopticon cometh. Very, very soon.
Here are a few examples of the political class’s undoubted commitment to caring for children:
· Forcing Covid vaccines on them, with permanent damage such as myocarditis to follow them for the rest of their lives;
· Locking them out of schooling for two years, a time that will forever stunt their development and learning;
· Driving the transgender agenda and ensuring that children “suffering” gender confusion can go behind their parents’ backs to get going on puberty blockers and the rest;
· Shoving gendered pronouns on five-year-olds;
· Bringing prancing female impersonators into libraries and classrooms;
· Transforming the school curriculum into a “how to masturbate” education for all.
The political class’s commitment to children’s welfare is there for all to see. Really. And voters fall for this?
Clearly, we are seeing here a wholesale shift in power from the parents to the state. The elites are saying, we no longer trust parents to supervise their children’s social media use. But this is merely a bonus. The real objective is control of the internet.
Joe Rogan has nailed it.
Step 1: You cause chaos.
Step 2: You step in to stop the chaos.
Step 3: You install new rules to make sure that there’s no more chaos anymore.
Step 4: You bring up a solution.
Step 5: That solution allows you to gain more control, and you just keep doing it until you have ultimate control over the people.
Joe Rogan Drops Crazy “Conspiracy Theory” – Vigilant News Network
This is redolent of the Rockefellers in the 1950s. Create a crisis. Make it global. Come in with a solution. And make that global. Rule the world.
It is even better still if you can create a moral panic – like suiciding teens responding to mean social media posts – that everyone (almost) can relate to. Bring in some cooked polls to show the proposed measure’s popularity. And in doing so lock in your mainstream political opponents. Then, you are away!
This is beyond “never let a crisis go to waste”. This is “create the crisis then propose the solution”. See also under “pandemics”. This is the new bible of policy development.
Then we come to Labor’s misinformation legislation. Chris Baxter at X sums it up:
Today is the darkest day for Freedom of Speech in Australian history. The Labor party has introduced its revised misinformation legislation to Parliament. Having read the legislation and posted my interim thoughts throughout the day, here is a summary of why you should be extremely concerned about it.
This legislation creates a two-tier rule book for what Australians can say, depending on who they are.
On the one hand, Government approved "professional" media gets a free pass to publish whatever they want, and on the other, all sorts of punitive actions can be taken against platforms that allow citizen journalism.
Whilst the punitive measures are cleverly not directly aimed at authors, they are such that digital platforms will have no choice but to shadow ban or otherwise silence those who persist with posting information the Government deems as misinformation or disinformation.
Government has also created mechanisms for the state to intrude within private chat groups that are beyond a threshold size that they will decide.
A register of misinformation will be created and maintained by ACMA and published on their website. No doubt this will become an important reference tool for institutionalising the Government's narrative, if it is not already, within mainstream media and education.
Of course no totalitarian imposition on free speech is possible without threats to the individual and so now any person who ACMA deems to have information in relation to what it regards as misinformation can be hauled before its "secret police", at threat of fines.
Cunningly, the legislation also creates so-called "media literacy plans" which I believe will be used to force digital providers to add Government approved framing and contextualisation to people's posts.
The new law will apply to almost every type of digital content including search engines and AI, because of course they couldn't have AI wrong-think either.
So many perspectives of ordinary Australians are soon to be silenced: from people who do not believe men can become women, to those who have doubts about the legitimacy of the banking system through to those who have different perspectives on health, medicines and vaccines.
Finally, and most ironically given the harms to democracy the legislation purports to address, the legislation unequivocally sets the need to mitigate "serious harm" above freedom of political communication.
I have provided references for everything I have just summarised in my posts of earlier today - I will link them below.
Australians have just been surrounded.
https://x.com/chrisbaxter41/status/1834108835772203332
It is the full-blown package. The two pieces of legislation together spell doom for our online freedom. Orwell will simply be embedded. Then there is Bill Gates.
Bill Gates also believes that most internet users will want to be in an online environment where you can identify who you’re communicating because “𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐲” — effectively abolishing the idea of anonymity.
Source: Australians v the Agenda Telegram channel, 9 September 2024
Finally, there is the UN Global Digital Compact. It is all happening at the Summit for the Future in a week or so’s time.
https://www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future/global-digital-compact
No doubt Australia’s representatives at the Summit will be cheering it on. This is context, again. Controlling the internet and killing its dissident narrative-challenging voices is now core business for the stakeholder fascist global regime.
The arrest of Pavel Durov for not having enough “moderators” on Telegram has been another big free speech story. Facebook has 15,000 fact checkers.
X has been banned in Brazil. Two hundred thousand protesters were not happy.
https://www.rebelnews.com/_we_love_elon_musk_brazilians_praise_musk_at_massive_free_speech_rally
Twenty million X users in Brazil is quite a constituency. Hopefully they will use this power at the next (no doubt, rigged) election there.
Monica Smit, recently vindicated by the Victorian courts in her battle against the criminal thugs of VicPol, has said:
I don’t want to live in a country where you can be arrested for allegedly ‘THINKING about MAYBE doing something’.
What a dangerous sentiment to consider. We must keep challenging police actions to ensure our rights to privacy and thought are not criminalised.
Look at UK right now…we’re next if we don’t stand up for ourselves
Indeed.
An outstanding recent analysis of the global psyop that is the technocratic state – perhaps THE outstanding analysis – was provided by Robert Malone, at the Von Mises Institute.
This is a keeper.
Back to Peter Dutton’s choice. And the Overton Window. This is the area of what is thought by “leaders” to be the acceptable range of respectable political topics, within which debates are contained. Pushing the energy envelope to include nuclear was a big step, as noted elsewhere. But our current mainstream politicians, at least those leaning right, feel very constrained to keep things hovering around what gets defined as the “centre”. The ultra-progressive wing of the UniParty feels no such compunction. Just look at the gender wars.
Here is an issue, a hill on which to die. Whether Dutton can break free of the Liberal Party’s recent past tilt at stakeholder tyranny, seen in spades during Covid and in relation to online safety measures – the sort previously championed by the appalling Paul Fletcher – is his moment of truth. And whether he can bring along the wets as well will be the measure of the man.
And this isn’t just a test for the Libs. The establishment, Liberal Party-connected punditocracy will be under scrutiny over this totalitarian turn as well. Where will Advance Australia be, for example? Will champions emerge from the mainstream? What on earth would it take to frighten them? Will they sit out the attempt by the ruling class to construct a fully integrated architecture of totalitarian control? Covid tyranny clearly didn’t fluster many of them. So, I am not especially optimistic. And a few off-the-cuff statements about “problems” with the legislation will not cut it. This has to be rejected in total and called out for the threat that it is.
We know that the Covid Five (Canavan, Antic, Rennick, Roberts and Babet) will come out swinging. But the record shows that it will be the dripping wet teals, the egregious Lambie and Pocock-style independents that will somehow need to be persuaded away from their normal predisposition towards nanny statism and overweening control of us.
Without wanting to be over-alarmist, the outlook is pretty damned grim. The other side has already begun the fight. Following Elon Musk’s totally justified reaction to the latest legislation, Labor’s gnome of an Assistant Treasurer – someone junior to Charmless Chalmers is difficult to imagine – had this to say:
“This [Musk’s statement calling the Australian Government fascists] is crackpot stuff… This is about sovereignty…
The Australian Government — like every other democratic country in the world, asserts its right to make Australians safe.
This is not about free speech…”
Australian Minister says CENSORING FREE SPEECH will PROTECT OUR SOVEREIGNTY - YouTube
These people make Gough Whitlam look like a moderate.
So, this is the new dividing line in democratic politicking. Safety versus freedom. Whoever knew that “safety” would be a thing, would justify tyranny? Pick a side. And, then fight, fight, fight.
Paul Collits
13 September 2024
Dear God, have mercy on us, save us from this tyranny. Set us free from all those elected to represent Australians, but who no longer represent them, but represent global interests instead.
While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction will come upon them like labor pains upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.