Anti-Protest

[Trunkage]

Hi all,

How Trump doing? How about this? Meet Oz PM, Scott Morrison

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/01/scott-morrison-threatens-crackdown-on-secondary-boycotts-of-mining-companies

Video: https://m.facebook.com/scottmorrison4cook/videos/no-place-for-radical-protest/773624113051015/

So, there are apocalyptic lefties that are breaking the 'right to protest.' Also, boycotting a business due to its practices should be illegal (they tried this 5 years ago under a different Prime Minister and failed.) How they will enforce this is unknown. All these protrsters are unreasonable, running the economy and in an earlier remark, should be named and shamed publically. Parents get your kids in line. To help with this, all masks may be banned at protests, to make the intimidation easier.

Note: There has been protest against coal which is generally peaceful this week. 6mths ago, there was a spate of animal activists around farms that were stealing farm animals to realise them. The stealing should be investigated. The Federal police also seized a bunch of documents from journalists, in an unrelated case. So our Freedom of the Press has been curtailed

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Also, boycotting a business due to its practices should be illegal

I'm going to have to bust out a 10 year old meme to convey my reaction here.

To be clear: I can't tell if this is something you are advocating or (more likely) you're explaining his stance.

 

[Trunkage]

Also, boycotting a business due to its practices should be illegal

I'm going to have to bust out a 10 year old meme to convey my reaction here.

To be clear: I can't tell if this is something you are advocating or (more likely) you're explaining his stance.

I'm just exasperated by the leader of the Liberal party. And I normally talk in sarcasm.

No, I'm not happy at all. I think he's trying to copy Trump's rhetoric (ie. Anyone who disagrees with me is awful.) But then getting called evil, abdominal, death weilding, society ruining Marxists is normal in my country, So, claiming that's he's copying Trump is a bit of a stretch.

People keep talking about Liberty being lost in the US. It's happening here too

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

I'm just exasperated by the leader of the Liberal party. And I normally talk in sarcasm.

Glad to have that clarified.

People keep talking about Liberty being lost in the US. It's happening here too

I think it's something of a global trend.

 

[Batou667]

Even reading your post through the lens of sarcasm and/or parody, it's not clear what stance you're taking or what you propose as a solution.

Being a boring git as usual, my answer to the question of the limits of speech, what form of protest is acceptable, whether boycotts are legal, etc, is to simply enforce the laws that are already on the books, fairly and impartially. There's a lot about the current climate of political activism I dislike - cancel culture, callout culture, deplatforming, employing the Heckler's Veto and calling it freedom of speech working as intended - and in some areas we definitely need some clarification, if not oversight. The last 10-15 years have really seen a blurring of the boundaries between official and unofficial information sources, and it leaves unanswered the question of who is liable for content posted on private platforms, and when does housekeeping become censorship (if ever).

In a public sphere, though? Simply apply the rules as written. Want to protest? Do it, within the boundaries of the law. Protestor breaks the law? Prosecute them. Everyone should have equality to exercise their freedoms and also access to protection from actions that cross the line.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

I think he's trying to copy Trump's rhetoric (ie. Anyone who disagrees with me is awful.)

I loathe Trump. But to be fair (even though I shouldn't be), that's not his rhetoric. Or just his rhetoric. That's literally almost every member of most social groups and dynamics under the sun these days.

Trump is just worst because he is the worst, he lies all the time, he will put the lives of our allies on the chopping block because it serves Putin, and Oh my God, he makes the sweet darkness of Oblivion look appetizing knowing that entropy will favor people such as him.

I think I came here with a thought before this. But Eff it, Trump is the absolute worst.

 

[Agema]

There's a lot about the current climate of political activism I dislike - cancel culture, callout culture, deplatforming, employing the Heckler's Veto and calling it freedom of speech working as intended

I'm honestly not convinced that cancel culture, callout culture and deplatforming are problematic in terms of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not extend to a right of access to numerous forms of specific media, nor an obligation for anyone to listen. Heckler's Veto, of course, is quite a different order of issue.

I'm not sure any of these tactics are "new", so much as that these days they are often more organised and there are special words for them. They also have to be considered in the context of the power of those who would aspire to speak unmolested, who are often themselves organised and well backed (in finance, status, etc.) to exploit avenues of communication not available to the likes of you and I.

...and it leaves unanswered the question of who is liable for content posted on private platforms, and when does housekeeping become censorship (if ever).

It strikes me the obvious issue here is that social media is a private platform that pretends it is public space where convenient. Of course it does - it's much cheaper and easier to pretend so, even if it owns and monetises everything on that virtual space. The answer is to potentially to make social media companies publishers of any publicaly available material, and thus properly responsible for the content. Or to make it properly public space, with attendant ramifications for ownership and income/costs - the government can look after it and charge the firms rent/rates and upkeep.

 

[Thaluikhain]

While it's certainly a worry, he's no Trump, he doesn't have that kind of dedicated support. Now, plenty of deplorables in Australia, but if he were to be ousted like his two predecessors (and the before before that in Labor) it'd not be a surprise, and we could easily get another non-entity like Turnbull.

 

[Seanchaidh]

I'll start taking the words 'cancel culture' seriously when the "intellectual dark web" isn't more famous and platformed than the idiot New York Times columnists who call them that.

 

[Trunkage]

There's a lot about the current climate of political activism I dislike - cancel culture, callout culture, deplatforming, employing the Heckler's Veto and calling it freedom of speech working as intended

I'm honestly not convinced that cancel culture, callout culture and deplatforming are problematic in terms of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not extend to a right of access to numerous forms of specific media, nor an obligation for anyone to listen. Heckler's Veto, of course, is quite a different order of issue.

I'm not sure any of these tactics are "new", so much as that these days they are often more organised and there are special words for them. They also have to be considered in the context of the power of those who would aspire to speak unmolested, who are often themselves organised and well backed (in finance, status, etc.) to exploit avenues of communication not available to the likes of you and I.

...and it leaves unanswered the question of who is liable for content posted on private platforms, and when does housekeeping become censorship (if ever).

It strikes me the obvious issue here is that social media is a private platform that pretends it is public space where convenient. Of course it does - it's much cheaper and easier to pretend so, even if it owns and monetises everything on that virtual space. The answer is to potentially to make social media companies publishers of any publicaly available material, and thus properly responsible for the content. Or to make it properly public space, with attendant ramifications for ownership and income/costs - the government can look after it and charge the firms rent/rates and upkeep.

Now, I could be remembering this wrong. But I seem to remember there being a US court case in the 1800s around green squares being provided by the state so anyone can speak. Pretty sure it was before the Civil War. It was in response to private institutions not allowing certain types of speech on their property. So...

1. Cancel Culture and Deplatforming is not new
2. Probably the best entity to protect free Speech is the government and maybe they need to set something up on the internet
3. Pretending private institutions should protect Free Speech has never been a thing

 

[CyanCat47_v1legacy]

Mask bans are spreading eh? Well now we know why so many elected officials in the west don't want to support Hong Kong. It's one big experiment in protester supression for them to take notes on

 

[tstorm823]

Mask bans are spreading eh? Well now we know why so many elected officials in the west don't want to support Hong Kong. It's one big experiment in protester supression for them to take notes on

I dont think it's fair to suggest people protesting in western nations covering their faces have the same need to do so as people hiding from an infrastructure of facial recognition systems implemented by a government known to slaughter dissidents.

 

[Trunkage]

Mask bans are spreading eh? Well now we know why so many elected officials in the west don't want to support Hong Kong. It's one big experiment in protester supression for them to take notes on

I dont think it's fair to suggest people protesting in western nations covering their faces have the same need to do so as people hiding from an infrastructure of facial recognition systems implemented by a government known to slaughter dissidents.

Maybe. Morrison talked to Ji Xin Ping not long before 'coming up' with the idea of getting rid of masks and cracking down on protesters. And I doubt the Chinese have better facial regonition software than the US and possibly Australia. The rhetoric also sounds familiar if you've heard Ping talk. Becuase Ping and Trump aren't that much different from each other. And possibly now Morrison. The US have far more of a percentage of people in prison. While they aren't dissidents, or being slaughtered, it's not comforting to know that large portions of the population are locked up. And Doxxing seems to be the tactic of the day in the West. Why kill someone when you can make them run away scared with death threats.

For Australia, I haven't liked their treatment of boat people. Some people have been locked up for 6 years with no indication of what's happening in sight. It's what gave Trump the impetus to try the Wall. Conservatives think locking people up indefinitely is justified. (They have sent back all who couldn't claim to be a refugee. Despite some peoples rhetoric, you can't just send refugees back where they came from.) I don't like this track record, and I wonder if it will be used on protestors. Sure. It's not slaughtering dissidents. Locking them up and scaring them away can be just as effective.

But then, me personally, I recognise that what's happening in HK is not being reported truthfully by any side. Chinese say they are doing a great job, the West is saying their being Tyrannical. It's probably somewhere in the middle. Some ex-contractors for the US armed forces are also pointing to indications that both the US and China are in the region stirring up the populace. They say this because they used to do it to other countries. Hence the Ex part, they realised intervetion is bad. I'm only hearing this second hand, so I take it with a grain of salt. But they are suggesting this is a reason for the West not supporting HK, they don't want to get caught up backing another intervetion

Another example this truthfulness is the claim about slaughtering dissidents, China says it's done nothing of the sort, or calling them terrorists. The West say they are slaughtering people. The truth is somewhere in the middle, and we are being primed to hate the Chinese by our media.

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

Mask bans are spreading eh? Well now we know why so many elected officials in the west don't want to support Hong Kong. It's one big experiment in protester supression for them to take notes on

The mask ban question routinely comes back around here too, everytime there's a heated demonstration or footie fan riot.

Spoiler: Rest of the world seemingly found some legal loopholes for those kind of regulations.

[img src=https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHKug-OXUAAtNIf?format=jpg&name=small]
[img src=https://compote.slate.com/images/ad152e05-7af4-4524-b864-e738c2ee481d.jpeg?width=780&height=1170&rect=1586x2379&offset=0x81][/spoiler] https://twitter.com/ajplus/status/1187044390633660416

Also, this: https://consequenceofsound.net/2019/07/juggalo-makeup-facial-recognition/

 

[CyanCat47_v1legacy]

Mask bans are spreading eh? Well now we know why so many elected officials in the west don't want to support Hong Kong. It's one big experiment in protester supression for them to take notes on

I dont think it's fair to suggest people protesting in western nations covering their faces have the same need to do so as people hiding from an infrastructure of facial recognition systems implemented by a government known to slaughter dissidents.

If they don't have the need to do so, why does the government need to know who they are, down to the last protestor? Even if not as extensive as that of China, the governments of the west made privacy an illusion long ago. Given Morrison's stated intentions it's also pretty clear why he wants the ban, to intimidate and punish people for protesting. Same thing happened with the 15-M protests in Spain and the Euromaidan protests in Ukraine, government tracking protestors via the internet in order to punish them. Protests and strikes are one of the few tools the common citizen actually have to get their opinion heard, as the lower and middle class will never be able to organize ad campaigns or lobbying on the same scale as the wealthy who can buy targeted ad campaigns and lobbying and keep it running for much longer. By threatening the right to protest, governments weaken democracy

 

[Agema]

I dont think it's fair to suggest people protesting in western nations covering their faces have the same need to do so as people hiding from an infrastructure of facial recognition systems implemented by a government known to slaughter dissidents.

Broadly true, but on the other hand to look at some of the sorts of things the police and security services have got up to, you might appreciate why people would wear masks. The police in the UK, for instance, have run surveillance on the grieving relatives of murder victims when they've campaigned for justice.

 

[tstorm823]

If they don't have the need to do so, why does the government need to know who they are, down to the last protestor?

Australia doesn't need to know who every protester is. They need to know who the rioters are. When groups go out to protest, often bad actors take the opportunity to go break things. When the Black Lives Matter protests were a major thing here, I promise most of the people were there with the right intentions to protest, but there were also stories of people driving in from out of town to take the opportunity to loot and riot. I also have little doubt that a lot of Antifa's bad reputation comes from a few people who don't even understand what communism or fascism are and just fantasize about the idea of administering "street justice".

Banning masks at large gatherings like protests would be a trade-off, sacrificing the anonymity of protesters to help defend against the infiltration of violent actors trying to commit crimes without getting caught. There's a debate to be had about whether that trade-off is worth it or not, but we have the privilege to debate something like that in countries where we know protester's won't get Tiananmen Squared. The Australian Government is not going to kill someone for having attended a protest. I cannot confidently say the same about the Chinese Government.

Broadly true, but on the other hand to look at some of the sorts of things the police and security services have got up to, you might appreciate why people would wear masks. The police in the UK, for instance, have run surveillance on the grieving relatives of murder victims when they've campaigned for justice.

I do appreciate that there are perfectly legitimate reasons to want to hide your identity anywhere. But there are also criminal reasons to want to hide your identity anywhere, and which of those options is more significant depends on where you are.

 

[Agema]

I do appreciate that there are perfectly legitimate reasons to want to hide your identity anywhere. But there are also criminal reasons to want to hide your identity anywhere, and which of those options is more significant depends on where you are.

I have a somewhat broad interpretation of fair resistance to authority, which extends to a certain amount of acceptance of civil disobedience up to and including low-level criminality.

It seems clear to me that the government is well invested in clamping down on resistance or challenge: that's what the OP is about. Most Western government agencies have a long and shady history of infiltrating, survelling and punishing groups opposing government policy which often go way beyond the threat such groups pose to civil order. The moves of government over the last few decades seem to me to point steadily towards increasing their ability to control - by which I really mean suppress - dissent. In many cases, this means criminalising forms of protest that once were legal. In others, disruption can include making an example of protestors, which can be easily done by increasingly catching them and punishing them for what is ultimately trivial.

Sure, few are getting summarily murdered or "disappeared". But I still think there's a justification for protestors to conceal their features.

 

[Kwak]

This just shows how explicitly owned by corporate interests our government is.
Have the opposition made any statements condemning this fascist suggestion?

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

This just shows how explicitly owned by corporate interests our government is.
Have the opposition made any statements condemning this fascist suggestion?

Up until like, a week ago, I?d forgotten who the Opposition Leader was. And no, I have not noticed Albo making any noise about this.