суточные щи - April 29th, 2016

Хорошую статью надыбал об австралийской политической жизни и вообще -

"Либеральный Фашизм", это то, что наблюдается повседневно - именно, чудовищное давление государства на индивидуума; любая частная инициатива, частная жизнь вообще оказывается автоматически под подозрением, контролем, обкладывается камерами наблюдения, полицейским присутствием, волокитой по судам и инстанциям. Крупный капитал, напротив, срастается с государственным аппаратом и чувствует себя как никогда привольно (хотя почему никогда - в расцвет германского нацизма крупный капитал очень свободно дышал между Германией и Штатами)

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2015/09/turnbull-conservatisms-rekindling/

All of these areas of public policy share one crucial characteristic – they involve the mobilization of state power to impose vast new structures of tightly regulated behaviour upon society that would not otherwise have evolved of their own accord. They also necessitate massive bureaucracies based on the Promethean assumption that the almost infinite intricacies of social, economic, and ecological life can be grasped, modelled, manipulated, and directed by the apparatus of the state (in which, of course, much of Turnbull’s progressivist constituency would be employed).

And let there be no doubt about it, this is the progressivist agenda: systematically to erode the power and autonomy of the individual, the family, the community and civil society, and to replace them with the Leviathan State, with its great tangled mass of bureaucratic tentacles reaching down to surveil, regulate and ultimately strangle the most intimate of personal and social relationships, covering every area of life.

It has become common to call this Leviathan the ‘Nanny State’, but that is far too kind a label and obscures the deadening and stultifying effect this multi-layered monstrosity has on everyday life. It suggests that the state can play a nurturing and empowering role in peoples’ lives, when in fact it plays a deadening and exploitative role, destroying initiative and draining money and resources from the productive sectors of society to fund its unquenchable appetite for power and domination.

It is far better to call the progressivist Leviathan for what it is – Left Fascism or what Jonah Goldberg called (in the American context) ‘liberal fascism’.

Еще о разгуле PC в австралийских университетах

“The complainant is Cynthia Prior. Ms Prior was a university administrator at QUT until she decided she simply couldn’t work any more for fear of being offended. The basis of her distress were a number of remarks  made online by QUT students, including the factual statement by one student that Indigenous-only computer labs were an example of ‘QUT stopping segregation with segregation’.

“Three respondents have each handed over $5000 to make the issue go away. But the case continues for the remaining respondents. But this complaint is just the tip of the iceberg.”

Mr Prior, whose trauma must be extreme indeed, wants $247,570.52 compensation.

Breheny was asked how much the current 18 complaints emanated from Muslim, Aboriginal and Jewish complaints. He said he considered race and religion to be irrelevant to the issue. But from a back-of-envelope tabulation, he noted complainants include Lebanese (1), Pakistani (1), Sinhalese (1), Indian (3), Australian (8), Chinese (1), and non-specific Asian (1), “dark-skinned” (1) and uncategorized (1).

“The progress of these complaints ranges from an acknowledgement to a final response following conciliation at the commission,” he said. “Details of these complaints are not made public. The documents provided to the IPA under FOI are heavily redacted. They include some basic procedural information, dates, and the race of the complainant but none of the conduct which forms the basis of the complaint.

“The conciliation process within the commission is shrouded in secrecy.  HRC Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane admitted this last year: ‘To give you a sense of how the law currently operates, last financial year the Commission received 440-odd complaints [including s18c complaints]. Only about 3% of those complaints ended up in proceedings before a court.’”

Breheny says, “That means that 97% of all complaints are dealt with behind closed doors. Only in 3% of cases, where the matter is not resolved at conciliation, is the public ever made aware of the details of a complaint.

“Why is this relevant? Because had it not been for the QUT complaint advancing from conciliation to litigation, the public would never have known the extent to which s18C threatens freedom of speech. And without transparency around the conduct, the public doesn’t have the opportunity to assess the practical operation of the law.

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/04/hundreds-reasons-detest-18c/