As Raven indicated in a previous post, even if you think Abdel-Magied didn’t express her views respectfully enough it seems like a very long bow to position them as the “ultimate insult”. Compare the response to Abdel-Magied’s Facebook post to this one by a Darwin bar, promoting an Anzac Day wet t-shirt competition.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/8470988-3x4-340x453.jpgThis is, in Raven's opinion, far more insulting than what Abdel-Magied wrote.
The event was criticised on Facebook for being “disrespectful” and “sexualising women on something respectful as Anzac Day”. The president of Darwin’s RSL wasn’t happy but he gave very measured advice and steered away from condemnation: “Just remember the fallen, a lot of people gave their lives. We’ve lost a lot of men and we’re still losing them in conflicts overseas, but the good thing is we’ve had no more attacks on our land and that’s an important thing to remember.”
But that was it. No heavy-handed political denunciations. Compare the muted response to an Anzac Day wet t-shirt contest with the ferocious backlash Abdel-Magied received for daring to bring up our treatment of refugees. The attacks from Hanson and Coalition MPs don’t seem to be entirely about the ‘sanctity’ of Anzac Day, but the fact that they really can’t handle having their own comfortable narratives challenged — especially by a migrant woman.
The clearest takeaway from this whole saga is how hypocritical conservative politicians can be on the question of freedom of speech. The same people who are now demanding Abdel-Maiged be fired and booted from the country for expressing her freedom of speech were just a few weeks ago positioning themselves as free speech purists in their defence of Bill Leak.
Pauline Hanson on Twitter:
Quote:| RIP Bill Leak. You will be remembered as a champion free speech. One of the few brace enough to point out when the emperor had no clothes. |
|
George Christensen, who was the most vociferous in his attacks on Abdel-Magied, spent his dying days as parliamentary whip championing a full repeal of Section 18C on the grounds of free speech. It’s absurdly inconsistent to defend a cartoonist’s right to publish work that regularly offends minorities while calling for someone else to be sacked because what they’ve said offends you.
The real test for freedom of speech supporters isn’t whether you’ll stand up and defend someone for saying something you agree with. It’s whether you’ll defend the right of someone to say something even if you fundamentally disagree with it. On that measure, Christensen, Hanson and co. have been found desperately wanting.
There were a couple of other incidents on Anzac Day that exposed a similar level of hypocrisy. 32-year old Joe Mekhael was arrested after shouting anti-war slogans during a dawn service in Sydney. Mekhael was charged with behaving in an offensive manner in a public place and resisting an officer in the execution of duty.
Whether you think Mekhael’s protest was untimely or offensive is besides the point. If you’re a freedom of speech purist (as those who want Section 18C repealed claim to be) arresting someone for holding a peaceful protest on the basis that it was “offensive” is a clear abridgement of that freedom. It’s a far greater abridgement than anything in Section 18C, which doesn’t carry any criminal penalties.
So you might expect the usual suspects to get worked up by it? After all, this is someone being arrested and charged because they expressed a political view. Maybe George Christensen would now devote his parliamentary career to reforming the law and protecting this kind of freedom of speech? Nope. Not a peep. Instead, Christensen and the rest piled on Abdel-Magied.
Meanwhile in South Australia, Kaurna elder Katrina Ngaitlyala Power was attacked by the state veteran’s affair minister for focussing on “political issues” after she gave a Welcome to Country referencing the “stolen land” of her ancestors. The federal education minister, Senator Simon Birmingham, also criticised Power, saying that Anzac Day was “not a chance to prosecute other agendas”.
All of these Anzac Day “controversies” highlight how insecure our conservative politicians and media commentators are when it comes to discussing what the day represents. They’re happy to politicise it to create narratives that suit them, but if you step outside that frame by bringing up refugees or the history of Indigenous persecution you become a target.
And if you’re a migrant woman of colour who also happens to be a Muslim and has demonstrated integration into Australia by every possible measure, and therefore represent everything these guys are petrified of, your right to freedom of speech evaporates. You don’t just become a target for criticism, you become the focal point for a sustained campaign designed to destroy your livelihood.
But despite these increasingly ferocious, deranged attacks the real losers out of this situation are Hanson, Christensen and their ilk. They’ve been exposed as desperate hypocrites, willing to throw apparently fundamental principles out of the window in an over-egged pursuit on the basis of a seven-word Facebook post.
