Watch out, however, for any argument that says Australia should not dictate terms to the social media giants because that’s what China does. That is classic false equivalence. The eSafety Commissioner is acting with the authority of a federal law passed by a parliament that reflects the will of a free people in a democracy.
The response in the article:
I’m not sure why “acting with the authority of a federal law passed by … a democracy” makes censorship OK. If every act of a democratically elected parliament is acceptable, would it also be acceptable for an elected parliament to pass a law abolishing all future elections? Would establishment journalists like David Crowe then write an article explaining that the abolition of elections was legitimate, because the politicians who abolished future elections were elected by the people?
I have a simpler response:
"The PRC has laws duly passed by their government that ban anything being said they don't like. So what makes you different other than appealing to "We're a Democracy, so we can legally censor anybody!"? Especially since the journalist calling for Musk's head(with a duly required slap at Trump) says
Musk poses a deceptive question: “Our concern is that if ANY country is allowed to censor content for ALL countries... then what is to stop any country from controlling the entire Internet?” He jumps to the alarmist scenario of total state power, without a moment’s thought about his responsibility for the content he publishes.
Hey, dickhead, your government is demanding the state power to censor anyone, anywhere, under the guise of YOUR law in YOUR country; that kind of sounds like 'total state power' you're demanding. Then trying to hide it under 'his responsibility for content'. Because you just can't stand the idea of someone, somewhere, seeing something you don't want them to.
Go screw yourself, and your eSafety Commissioner, too.
* Perfect place for this quote:
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences. - C.S. Lewis
* Perfect place for this quote:
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences. - C.S. Lewis
1 comment:
Australians aren't citizens. They are subjects of the British Crown. Like Canada, the Bahamas, Scotland and North Ireland.
Citizens have rights over their government and the rights are given to them by God. Subjects have no rights other than what's been given to them by their leaders and owners.
Unfortunately, we in the USA aren't citizens anymore. We are subjects. Want to fish, buy a gun, go hunting on your own property, fix a stock pond on your own property, smoke, drink, buy food, store food, grow your own food, cook food and eat it? All require government permissions to do. Though we aren't so much a monarchy, we are a national socialist country rapidly approaching a feudal state.
Post a Comment