Section 18C: From Tyrannical to Tyrannical by Ian Wilson LL.B

At present, there are two main positions for reform of section 18 C of the Racial Discrimination Act. The first is to keep the section, including the “offence” clause, but to add a reasonable person test. Actually, media comments referred to the “man on the Bondi tram,” but he is long gone. Instead it could be a woman or transgendered person, which is not a trivial point. “Man” is sexist, and that is close to “racist.”

Those championing this idea are quick to add that while they value free speech, they do not accept “racist and xenophobic speech.” Today such speech has been redefined to include almost anything worth saying about race and immigration.

The sorts of debates that occur in the United States will still be off limits to us, and so will any criticism of specific ethnic groups, however justified in theory. In the US Supreme Court case of Texas v. Johnson (109 S. Ct, at 2544), it was held that “hate speech” and offensive speech is “free speech”: “The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.” That is what the multicult/ethnic lobby does not want.

Worse, in a country which now has over 25 percent of the population born overseas (5.3 million people), with almost 16 percent (3.3 million people) born in non-English speaking countries, what constitutes a reasonable ordinary person with respect to this subject matter is controversial. Courts may see such a person as fully multiculturalised anyway, and simply adopt the same interpretation of section 18 C which we have now.

Alternatively, they may find an even stricter condition. Who knows? The reasonable person test sounds good, but in the court the test will become stricter than any ordinary person could meet, merely replicating the problems which presently exist.

Then there is the idea of replacing “insult” and “offend” with the word “harass” to allegedly stop complaints about hurt feelings. However, it won’t. Ethnics who now feel offended about criticisms, will alternatively argue that they find such comments harassing, and they do so now. Either way, nothing will change.

Remember, the courts have been populated with lawyers trained to put multiculturalism as the highest value, not liberalism. The crop of female lawyers coming through law schools now will put even this generation to shame. Section 18 C was drafted for social control, and is completely inconsistent with fundamental liberal principles.

The hard truth in this is that immigration and multiculturalism irreversibly change societies, and the Australia today, is not the liberal-democratic society of the past, but some new multicultural mutant, with a shell of the past qualities, but with entirely new ones based around non-Anglo Saxon values. Section 18 C is just one example of this, but there are many others, such as creeping gun control, which I think John Steele is writing about, and all of the gender issues.

Incredibly the elites have not only wiped out race, well, our race, but also manhood to boot.
This cannot end well.
Australia is over and we should now be working on Plan B, or is it Plan Z now.
I know that Eric, as a soldier, would have been thinking along these lines.