The insatiable appetite to repeal 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, arising out of a narrow conception of “free speech”, amid cries of censorship, amounts to one of the biggest ideological distractions of the past three years.
It’s little wonder that One Nation, threatening to revive and intensify some of the ugliest and most bigoted debates this nation is capable of, is desperate to get on board the repeal 18C train – they see the opportunity to smash the floodgates open and allow all kinds of ugly hate speech at our nation’s most marginalised people. If they’re successful, it’ll be thanks to those Liberals who think the frustrations of a bigot unable to openly vilify the marginalised are more important than our social harmony.
Between the return of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, with four senators; Sonia Kruger’s “maternal concern” over Muslim immigration; and Bill Leak’s ugly cartoon in response to the Don Dale report, set amid troubling global times, more than ever minorities in Australia are rightly fearful of a rekindling of the cultural wars and the subsequent victimisation of their communities.
It’s little surprise, therefore, that with these increasing tensions ; and Malcolm Turnbull’s double dissolution election providing the Senate with a cast of characters so whacky one starts to miss the motoring enthusiast who played with poo; a renewed push is on to repeal or amend section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.
Episode One of the 18C speech wars ended in a blaze of glory – soundly dumped in an all-too-rare example of Abbott government pragmatism. The ideological prime minister disappointed the IPA and Andrew Bolt (whose adverse finding launched the whole repeal push) by dumping proposed changes in the face of fierce and sustained criticism.
Indeed, the changes were so ill-conceived they united Australia’s Indigenous, Chinese, Vietnamese, Lebanese, Jewish, Greek, Islamic and Armenian community groups against them.
While virtually every ethnic minority group capable of being the subject of racial vilification was united in opposition to it, the law reform was, and still is, championed by those who couldn’t be. To put it crudely – it was a bunch of white men up against Australia’s multi-ethnic communities.
While attorney general George Brandis, and the new IPA-trained Liberal parliamentarians, Senator James Paterson and Tim Wilson, are undoubtedly well-versed in theories of liberalism and free speech; and despite Scott Morrison’s claims that he’s suffered from “hatred and bigotry” for his views on marriage equality; they’re hardly a cast of characters aware of the deep pains of racism.
What better way to demonstrate that than Liberal Democrat Senator David Leyonhjelm making a complaint to the RDA against Fairfax for a satirical depiction of him by Mark Kenny as a “boorish, supercilious know-all with the empathy of a besser block” and an “angry white male”. Leyonhjelm, claiming it is likely to be offensive to white men, in a seemingly confused attempt to highlight either the double standards of the law and of race theory, or the breadth of the law, will likely fail on both accounts, but it demonstrates how out of touch he and the free speech brigade are with the genuine harms of racism and bigotry, and the contempt they have for real victims of it.
The overhaul of 18C wasn’t abandoned for lack of ideological will. Most of the campaign’s ideologues in the government admit it is regretfully off the table for now. But some government backbenchers have signalled they may be willing to cross the floor over it and Cory Bernardi has sponsored a bill to amend the section. They now have a crossbench coalition of One Nation, Family First’s Bob Day, Leyonhjelm and Derryn Hinch in favour of it.
Tony Abbott has also admitted his regret over abandoning the changes, labelling its opponents, or perhaps victims of racist vilification, “thin-skinned activists”, again displaying the lack of empathy for minority groups among the free-speech ideologues pushing the reform.
None of this is to say that only minorities should determine what is unacceptable. 18C requires an objective community standards test. It is not up to any one person to say, “I am offended”. Nor should we dismiss or sneer at the kind of concerns that have led to the rise of Hansonist populism in July’s election. But let’s get real – there is scant evidence to suggest 18C is censoring or constraining public debate on anything. Kruger and Hanson’s antics surely show we have plenty of space for racist inanity free of any legal recourse.
We needn’t have to endure howls of free speech every time someone who exercises a bigoted opinion faces pressure for their views. Leak’s cartoon was a perfect example of that.
Too many self-described freedom advocates say that open debate, rather than the law, is best place to defeat racism and bigotry; only to cry foul when the court of public opinion finds in favour of so-called “political correctness”. That, after all, is what JS Mill identified as a “social tyranny” more powerful than the law.
18C does not catch all cases but it provides respite – civil, not criminal – to those which have the real potential for damage. It typically forces conciliation, not litigation. It gives power to the voiceless. It recognises, fundamentally, that there is real, calculable damage when racial vilification is allowed to fester in the public domain. It feeds the worst kind of movements capable of growing into hate that can do more than just offend – it can put racial and ethnic minorities in physical and mental harm’s way.
As minorities of all backgrounds justifiably fear what the revival of Pauline Hanson and One Nation will mean for racism in this country, 18C’s repeal would send all the wrong signals that the rivers of hate are starting to break through. I don’t believe most Australians want that by any means. But sometimes, the loudest and angriest voices penetrate far beyond their mandate, and cause the deepest kind of personal and societal damage.
People don’t need to have the right to be bigots – we can be better than that. We can have serious, mature debates about issues of significance without racial discrimination and vilification. 18C won’t prevent us from doing so – only small-mindedness and arrogance will. What 18C does – providing respite to victims of racism and bigotry – is too important for that. Now is exactly the worst time to repeal it.
