Perceived freedom of Australia’s free speech pseudo laws

         The Great Transition is a term used by the Great Transition Initiative and its predecessor, the Global Scenario Group (GSG – Based in Sweden), to describe a vision of a just and sustainable global future. The term was originally coined by Kenneth E. Boulding in The Meaning of the 20th Century – The Great Transition (1964). Describing the shift from pre-modern to post-modern culture, and the four possible courses of action that these organisations believe will allow humanity to successfully manage, ‘The Great Transition.’

As Gretta Thunberg news continues to roll in and make international news, how does Australia fit into this debate and is it even relevant to buy in? Yes. Australia needs to consider very carefully its next move, especially when talking about its future in the global economy from the point of view of the following Millennium Development Goals, which include,

·      eradicating extreme poverty and hunger,

·      achieving universal primary education,

·      promoting gender equality and empowering women

·      reducing child mortality rates,

·      improving maternal health,

·      combating HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases,

·      ensuring environmental sustainability, and

·      developing a global partnership for development.

The problem that Australia has as a Developed Nation in the Annex I category in relation to Sustainable Development, is our dependence on China.

In relation to what could be done to achieve this Great Transitionin Australia is to reconsider what constitutes Australians’ right to Freedom of Speech (a basic fundamental right). Sustainability and quality of life are based on essential principles of basic needs and rights that people require to achieve meaningful and happy lives (The Dalai Lama). When people are oppressed and held down, it can lead to anarchy. For example, the Black Panther movement in the United States in the 70’s.

One Great Philosopher of modern times who defines the struggles of an oppressed people held down by segregation, with a lack of fundamental human rights with no real way of achieving success in life was Tupac Shakur an American legend. His voice talks about the struggles of African American people in the Ghettos of the United States of America. He used his poetic license to influence other people who were similar to him. He was murdered at the age of 25 but has sold more copies of his albums after his death than when he was alive. Why? And so, where is this all going? Who gives a fuck?

It comes back to freedom of speech, and the rights that people should have in Australia to say things in relation to the things they believe in. Australia is still behind other Annex II countries in their treatment of indigenous Australian’s and Australians in other countries are known to be racist and are considered racist, through my personal experience. Fuck it, let’s go climb ‘Ayers Rock.’

The major thing holding back Australia from achieving the Great Transition(which could be argued is just a modern utopian cult) is the political system in this country. There is a lack of freedom of speech in which if people speak-out they may be locked away by the Government.

In Australia, court hearings are not required for involuntary commitment. Mental health law is constitutionally under the state powers. Each State thus has different laws, many of which still have not been updated in recent years. This is in my opinion of major concern. Who decides if what someone says is truth or not? And why is an opinion considered wrong, if we have the right to say it in the first place. For fear of persecution? Surely not… But in fact, you would be wrong if you thought otherwise.

Freedom of speech

Australians are free, within the bounds of the law, to say or write what we think privately or publicly, about the government, or about any topic.We do not censor the media and may criticise the government without fear of arrest. Free speech comes from facts, not rumours, and the intention must be constructive, not to do harm. There are laws to protect a person's good name and integrity against false information. There are laws against saying or writing things to incite hatred against others because of their culture, ethnicity or background. Freedom of speech is not an excuse to harm others.

 

Freedom of association

We are free to join any organisation or group if it is legal. We can choose to belong to a trade union or to a political party. Having and debating points of view allows for a healthy and strong democracy.

 

Freedom of assembly

We are free to meet with other people in public or private places. We can meet in small or large groups for legal social or political purposes. Being able to protest and to demonstrate is an accepted form of free expression. Protestors must not be violent or break laws such as assaulting others or trespassing on private or public property. People can change governments in a peaceful way by elections and not by violence.

 

Freedom of religion

Australia does not have an official or state religion. The law does not enforce any religious doctrine, however, religious practices must conform to the law. We are free to follow any religion we choose. We are also free not to have a religion.

 

Freedom of movement

We can move freely to and from all states and territories. We can leave and return to Australia at any time. Some migrants may have conditions placed on their visa until they become Australian citizens.

 

Thus, all the Government has to say about freedom of speech. In essence is, we cannot actually say things that could enact change in the constitution, because it’s against the law.

 

It would be my hope that in the future, we might as an entire global population decide in relation to sustainability, (i) what it means, and (ii) what it means in relation to basic human rights. However, human rights are abused in this country, in our commitments with China, our major trading partner (China’s anti Dalai Lama stance, and Falun Gung and more recent Urighur treatment). So, we might think that we are being self-righteous and turn a blind eye to it all but in the end a line must be drawn in the sand against, China’s Anti this, Anti that stances which go against Australia’s basic fundamental human rights laws, but also somehow not against our freedom of speech laws (Free Hong Kong). And it may be a long road but I rest assured in the lives of others who died for their cause I too will resist a similar fate.

 

Projects OfficeComment