Several months ago Auckland University of Technology’s History Professor Paul Moon released an open letter signed by 27 New Zealanders warning free speech was under threat:
Freedom of speech underpins our way of life in New Zealand as a liberal democracy. It enables religious observance, individual development, societal change, science, reason and progress in all spheres of life. In particular, the free exchange of ideas is a cornerstone of academe.
Governments and particular groups will from time to time seek to restrict freedom of speech in the name of safety or special interest. However, debate or deliberation must not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most people to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.
Universities play a fundamental role in the thought leadership of a society. They, of all places, should be institutions where robust debate and the free exchange of ideas take place, not the forceful silencing of dissenting or unpopular views.
Individuals, not any institution or group, should make their own judgments about ideas and should express these judgments not by seeking to suppress speech, but by openly and vigorously contesting the ideas they oppose, without discrimination or intimidation.
We must ensure that our higher learning establishments are places where intellectual rigour prevails over emotional blackmail and where academic freedom, built on free expression, is maintained and protected. We must fight for each other’s right to express opinions, even if we do not agree with them.
The Key part of the letter in terms of our free speech and the context for this post:
“Individuals, not any institution or group, should make their own judgments about ideas and should express these judgments not by seeking to suppress speech, but by openly and vigorously contesting the ideas they oppose, without discrimination or intimidation,”
Keeping in mind this was a few months ago, the Human Rights Commission stated that they did not want to change hate speech laws. HRC spokeswoman Christine Ammunson also stated that it was not advocating for a change to hate speech laws, and that what it did want is for Police to collect “hate crime” data as part of crime statistics.
There we have the HRC clearly stating their position.
So why is it that we currently have the Race Relations Commissioner Dame Susan Devoy in Geneva submitting a report to the United Nations under the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination that directly contradicts the exact position they stated they were holding?
What Dame Susan Devoy doesn’t seem to grasp (or maybe she does) is that slipping these marxist recommendations under the door of parliament undermines our civil liberties as a society for freedom of speech, of free and frank debate, sometimes even borderline discussion about issues that are relevant to us, and put us in danger of falling afoul of the law for criticising religion or beliefs and making it a “hate crime” to criticize Islam.
What these recommendations if passed into legislation would do is have our freedom of speech slip backwards in line with uncivilized and outdated Sharia law making it an offence to criticize Islam, the Quran or anything else that would trigger the sensitivities of the religion of peace followers, or any other religion that was running low on tolerance for a liberal society.
I’ve said it many times before and I’ll say it again, Dame Susan is out of her depth as the Race Relations Commissioner, and it shows. Her appointment is just one of Judith Collins’ many mistakes and Collins should be joining the queue of valedictory speeches before parliament goes into recess for the election.
The HRC lied to us, and are doing the complete opposite to what they stated their intentions as being. As for the UN, they aren’t fit to be calling the numbers at Bingo down at the local hall on Thursday night, let alone reviewing a report given some of those countries harshly punish their citizens for criticizing the religion of peace.
If you’re not worried, you should be.
