Racists and Jihadis both have the right of free speech

No party, such as the Liberal Party of Australia, that spuriously restricts freedom of speech through the promulgation and enforcement by the state of a law of sedition can remotely be said to be a liberal party.

Ironically enough these same laws define, in part, seditious intention, which is a criminal offence, to be the promotion of"feelings of ill-will or hostility between different groups so as to threaten the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth."

One could argue that racist and neo-fascist groups, such as the United Patriots Front and Reclaim Australia, fall under the ambit of this law. But notice the state does not act to enforce the law in this instance.

To deny others the freedom of speech under seditious intention, as so defined, whilst allowing racists that same freedom is to reserve a right to speak ill of wogs, kikes and niggers but not of white anglo-celtic society.

Such be state sanctioned racism, not just a denial of freedom speech.

The founder of modern anarchism, Mikhail Bakunin, in his Revolutionary Catechism of 1866, argued for "unlimited freedom of propaganda, speech, public or private assembly, with no other restraint than the natural salutary power of public opinion."

Yet Australia's anarchists have chosen to reject Bakunin's libertarian principle. Noam Chomsky, another noted anarchist activist, observed that "with regard to freedom of speech there are basically two positions: you defend it vigorously for views you hate, or you reject it and prefer Stalinist/fascist standards."

Australia's anarchists have chosen the fascist standards, which is both an irony and a pity.

Racists and Jihadis both have the right of free speech

One is in favour of speech for views one despises for otherwise one is not in favour of free speech.

Although Australian politics has been convulsed, quite literally, by issues revolving around free speech it is sad, indeed shocking, to see how many on both sides of the ideological spectrum do not defend the principle of free speech come what may.

Two recent events have brought this to relief, the first concerns the Left's response to the recent staging of racist and neo-fascist protests and the second to the Right's stoking of the Zaky Mallah affair.