Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Then they came for the libertarians

By Peter Fenwick - posted Monday, 27 September 2021

On Saturday morning, 18th September 2021, police officers, in groups of six, were milling around the Treasury Gardens. I approached two groups and asked the leader of each what they were there for. They each replied that they were there to keep us safe. It seemed like a prepared response.

But we are not safe if we politicise the police force. We are not safe if those who wish to criticise government are met with violent confrontation. We are not safe if journalists are dissuaded from reporting protests accurately. We are not safe if media photographers are capsicum sprayed and bowled over whilst covering these events. Gay Alcorn, Editor of The Age, is right to make a formal complaint. (The Age, 20th September)

As Nick Cater explained in an email:


The rights to peaceful protest, freedom of association and freedom of expression have been suspended. On whose authority? That of Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton. The emergency powers give the CHO the unilateral authority to over-rule our cherished freedoms. It was on the strength of Sutton's signature alone that the police used para-military tactics to disperse the crowd and arrest people for the crime of simply turning up.

The police used semi-automatic 175-shot pepper-ball rifles to fire capsicum rounds and rubber bullets the size of marbles. They were also equipped with 40mm launchers that fire hard, squash-ball-like projectiles designed to hit offenders from 50 metres away and impact with the force of a very hard punch.

The soundtrack to the demonstration was more startling than the images. The sound of a mob punctuated with the cracking of rifles, albeit loaded with non-lethal projectiles, sounds foreign to Australian ears.

A year ago, I wrote a blog entitled "Protests may resume once it is safe to do so" satirising Dan Andrews' comments about Zoe Buhler, the young mother who was charged with incitement and had her mobile phone confiscated for daring to organise a protest in Ballarat. Apparently, twelve months later, it is still not safe!

In the seven weeks since Lockdown No. 6 was implemented, putting hundreds of thousands out of work and denying us the right to invite friends to our homes, the number of COVID cases per day has risen one-hundred-fold. The argument that it is effective is, to say the least, contestable.

Not everyone who disagrees with Dan Andrews is wrong. Not everyone who disagrees with Dan Andrews has evil intent. Not everyone who disagrees with Dan Andrews is violent. Those who hold different views should not be silenced. In a free society, citizens should be able to get together to express their opinions – more so if their disagreement is with government regulations and directives.

Emergency measures should not be used to stifle peaceful opposition to the emergency measures themselves. Henry Ergas, "Protecting our freedom to protest peacefully", The Australian (24th September)

Libertarians are being vilified. In press reports, negative adjectives are added – "libertarian activists" or "right-wing libertarians" – and stories focus on unpleasant incidents but avoid discussing the issues raised by the protesters. On TV, old film clips of Neo-Nazis in the Grampians are shown to imply some affinity. All this is deliberately designed to denigrate those who believe in freedom.


In his famous 1946 poem, Lutheran theologian Martin Niemoller wrote:

First they came for the Socialists,
And I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists,
And I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.

It is time for the vilification of those who disagree with Dan Andrews to stop. It is time for those who believe lockdowns have been ineffective both here and internationally to be heard. Peacefully and respectfully. Let us take off the masks and live again. Democratically.

Arbitrary authoritarian rule, supported by a politicised police force and a compliant media is no way to live. Nor is it sustainable. If we want our free society back, we must speak out. Now.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

This article was first published on Peter Fenwick.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

11 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Peter Francis Fenwick is the author of The Fragility of Freedom and Liberty at Risk both published by Connor Court. He blogs at

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Peter Fenwick

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 11 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy