Section 18C is a Symbol of the Coming Need for Secessionism in Australia by Ian Wilson LL.B.

There is consensus among conservatives that section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, has been, and certainly is now, a threat to free speech, even a very modest version. (The Australian, March 1, 2017, p. 4). This is because, as shown by recent cases, this law makes it unlawful to make public statements that are offensive to ethnic minorities, and the question of offensiveness is decided not by consideration of the standards of the ordinary reasonable person, but by the ethnic community that has been offended. Talk about a conflict of interest!

How could one not get tyranny from such a result? What if the ethnic community in question, call them Martians, had done things, which were bad, harmful to the interests of another community? This, after all, is what ethnic conflict is all about. It becomes impossible to criticise that ethnic community because by definition, someone will be offended, because that is part of having an ethnic interest. So, freedom of speech becomes impossible because the bar of “offense” is impossibility low. What happens then when there is no longer a lawful method of dealing with conflict through words? Take an educated guess.

The Left, progressives and professional ethnics will have none of this, and see section 18C as necessary to hold back a tidal wave of racism, all from Anglo-Australians, whom they racially vilify as racists. Even if this was true, their only explanation for this is that Anglo-Australians are racists who need to be hit hard with the full force of the law to be silenced. No matter, that if they really were racists, they would not be worrying about small measures like the law, to halt their hypothetical racism. There are laws against drug trafficking, but plenty of that still goes on.

As it now stands, the parliamentary review has predictably backed only a “process change” to the rules, including replacing the terms of 18C, such as “insult,” “offend” and “humiliate,” with the word “harass.” This is somewhat superficially better than things at present, but I predict that our politically correct courts are just going to redefine the word “harass,” so that it includes “offend” anyway.

There will then be a continuing expanding round of cases. At present, there has been a “blowout’ in racial hatred cases: The Australian, February 28, 2017, p. 7. This is only likely to get worse because section 18C has now taken on a life of its own, becoming an ethnic/multicult symbol of power.

All of the cultural war problems discussed at this site indicate that Australia has become so divided that it is desirable for it to now split up: but not as the progressives plan. The division should be between traditional Australia and progressive Australia, if you like, the Californians down under. Why should a marriage producing untold misery continue? They hate us, and I think we now hate them. Time for divorce everyone: http://takimag.com/article/is_secession_a_solution_to_cultural_war_patrick_buchanan/print#axzz4a7U7mR80. This may be the only peaceful outcome of a cultural war. The Left would be free to impose the utter limits of politically correct laws and cultural practices to their hearts’ content.
Isn’t that better for us all?