"The Prime Minister and his minions say that the safety of the Australian people is their number-one priority and that they are proposing to limit our liberties in order to protect our freedom. We all know how to sneer at this rhetoric and where to look for the appropriate analogues: to the USA Patriot Act and the British state security apparatus, for a start. But the government's reasoning is really no different to the reasoning of those who would curtail free speech in the name of social harmony. In the end, it comes down to the following question: what kind of relationship between the individual and the state are we, the people, prepared to accept."

Well said, great article.

Yes it really is nauseating to hear Tony Abbott talk about 'Team Australia' fighting terrorism; and the moron rushing to kick the worst most chronic hornets nest in the world, in the name of keeping Australia safe.

However you can only shake your head in wonder at the double standards and cognitive dissonance of the leftists in criticising Abbott. These are the ones who are never able to answer with any principle to limit government power than the non-principle that it be "democratic". Well? It never occurs to them that the interventionist foreign policy that they hate, has anything to do with the interventionist domestic policy that they love and consistently promote in everything.

By the way Richard, a government that is "socially libertarian and economically socialistic" is a contradiction in terms. People aren't chattels owned by government or by you.

This is a very clever article, one that, initially, should appeal to the many black and white bigots who all too frequently congregate on OLO.

The sending of Australian warplanes and troops to the M.E. then leaving them there while Tony decides whether or not to send them into battle is also rather ironic. It could start a whole new fashion in world politics and military strategies.

Perhaps the U.S. could send thousands of fighter jets and many battalions of Marines to the Ukraine, then say it hasn't made its mind up yet whether to deploy them!

And then Russia could move weapons and men to Cuba to be ready should Putin decide that attacking the U.S. over its sanctions is on his agenda!

Humans are so intelligent, aren't they?

P.S. Tony, that doesn't include you!

as a white male who believes in the natural family unit, preserving life instead of murdering the unborn, calling the teachings of the Koran barbaric I am comfortable with the 'regressives' labels. I doubt whether any of my family members or work colleagues or anyone who knows me would call me a bigot/sexist etc however it fits the narrative of feminist/progressives. So be it. Its so sad that those who spew out the most hate (usually dressed up in pseudo intellectualism) come from the left and yet they see themselves as the champions of 'decency'. I am afraid unlike the likes of Ms Gillard I can't claim some made up vicitm status to cover my incompetentcies.

JKJ,

"Yes it really is nauseating to hear Tony Abbott talk about 'Team Australia' fighting terrorism; and the moron rushing to kick the worst most chronic hornets nest in the world, in the name of keeping Australia safe."

Well said!

Interesting though that although this is being enacted by an extreme right-wing outfit in Australia - that you bounce the Left.

Besides, it doesn't really matter if the regime is fascist, Communist or a "democracy" such as ours...if the govt chooses to exploit the domestic population with dubiously overblown "terror threats" and institute laws that suppress freedoms, it's down to the particular govt of the day - and their handmaidens (thanks for nothing, Labor).

I suppose we all believed that an "Australian govt" would never manipulate us this way...well this one has - and good and properly too!

runner,

" So be it. Its so sad that those who spew out the most hate...."

No worries there, you've got that one sewn up.

Abbot presumes that Australians prefer their safety over their liberty. This says more about him than it does about the rest of us. He is no leader or inspiration to the best of our human qualities.

History is full of great men and women who have refused to remain silent just for the sake of their own physical well-being. They have brought about great changes in society and we are forever in their debt. No one really knows which value they would uphold if they were put to the ultimate test but you cannot assume everyone would choose safety. You cannot even assume that the majority would do so. If you have no abiding argument that they would choose one way or the other then you have to give them the freedom to choose simply because as a principle it is better to have more freedoms than less.

Let the people take responsibility for their own choices. If citizens do not like what their fellows choose well that is the price of freedom. Many who think they would prefer safety jump eagerly on to the ‘Team Australia’ band wagon but perhaps they may surprise themselves and act to protect their freedom of speech rather than safety. They should trust their instinct and they should be given the freedom to trust it.

This also sends a potent message to terrorists that unlike them we do not necessarily give in to fear. Our values are more important to us than our safety. Any victory that comes by force is a very hollow one and you cannot undo the violence that you deliver upon others. Terrorists are still human beings who have consciences and no matter how much bravado they exhibit in a mob they cannot rid themselves of the guilt they will always carry from their violence. It will torment them the rest of their lives. Who is really free – the person who has died with their values intact or the person who spends the rest of their life being eaten up inside by their brutality?

Dear Runner,

"One who puts on his armor should not boast like one who takes it off." [Kings I, 20:11]

Today, state-power seems to be on your side, so you allow yourself to be relaxed and confident, but that need not be forever. Once it is accepted that government is allowed to infringe on individual freedoms, another government might come ("Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph") with different ideas and start oppressing religion and the religious. It was in our times even that some states banned religion, North Korea still does and forced abortions are still prevalent in China.

Please don't play with fire.

The only way to keep our religious freedom is to have freedom for everyone, whether or not we like what they do.

---

Dear Phanto,

Great response, I liked it very much!

---

Dear Jardine,

Yes, I would also like to understand what the author means by "socially libertarian and economically socialistic" - it seems a contradiction, but perhaps he came across some formula that we missed.

I don't like capitalism, but I can't see how it could be prevented with human population in the billions and without taking away individual freedoms, so I have to reluctantly accept it. Yet if the author possesses some magic, I would very much want to know about it.

An interesting and thought-provoking article.
The problem, of course, is that for many/most Australians, security appears the more pressing need than liberty. Having taken their freedom for granted for so long, I don't think most people even give it a thought.
Since for most their freedom has not been bought with an (obvious) price they esteem it as naught and it will only be recognised once it is completely gone.
If we do not stand up and defend basic rights of speech et al when we don't need it - and even when we disagree with the speech and/or the speaker - the right will be gone when we do need it.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin

The government does not own me like I am a possession.
It has no right to invade my home without a warrant and without showing cause.
It has no right to tell me where I can and cant go on the planet.
It has no right to imprison me without charge.
Tony Abbot thinks we live in North Korea.
Its not my fault he allowed all these kinds of people from overseas into the country.
And its not my fault his foreign policy is aligned with the US and western imperial interests which have made this country a target for terrorism.
He should think about locking himself, Julia Bishop and every other politician in the country up for the choices they have made that has brought this upon us before he starts looking at the rest of us.
Stay out of the Middle East and stop aligning ourselves with US interests in the region, simple.
I look at the root cause of the problem when thinking about a solution.
Locking up foolish individuals isn't a long term solution and does nothing for the people responsible to take responsibility.
All because they seek more power for themselves by having closer ties with people from the US.
Its selfish and treasonous to the citizens of this country.
Do we all realise that China's military might will surpass the US at around 2017?
And China owns 95% of mineral rights in this country.
Do you think they wont try to defend their interests if something bad happens?

Poirot
While ever you lack any consistent principle for deciding whether government should, or not should not, be doing any particular thing, it just means you're floundering around in double standards and self-contradictions. Unlike the term left wing, which both leftists and non-leftists use consistently to mean those advocating public control of the means of production, right wing has no consistent meaning and is used to mean the fundamentally different and radically opposed philosophies of national socialists, neo-conservatives, classical liberals, liberertarians and anarcho-capitalists.

Thinking of left and right as intrinsically opposed is fine when we're talking about anatomy. In politics, it only denotes ignorance and confusion. You would be fine with invading Iraq if your beloved Labor party were doing it. Unlike you, I'm consistently in favour of liberty. You can't decide whether you believe in unlimited government power, or not, and when challenged either come down on the side of totalitarianism ever time, or go quiet and run away.

So ... is it okay to threaten to attack people if it's government doing it, or not?

Yes Tony has signed us up to the all-encompassing shadow world of the US created Intelligence Labyrinth as described in the latest essay on TomDispatch.
An all-encompassing constantly morphing fractalizing labyrinth that George Orwell could not have even begun to imagine.
And of course the loyal "opposition" has not opposed any of it.

JKJ,

"....You would be fine with invading Iraq if your beloved Labor party were doing it...."

Wrong!

Good article, and very nicely written, drawing the clear links between freedom of speech, freedom of action, and privacy.

Both the political left and right have behaved shamefully on this issue, so keen to curtail freedoms they disapprove of, that they are willing to sacrifice those they value.

We all understand now that the ideals of social cohesion and freedom are in conflict with one another, in light of that after a 47 year tenure I wish to tender my resignation from Team Australia, effective immediately.

'runner,

" So be it. Its so sad that those who spew out the most hate...."

fits your perverted and distorted narrative well Poirot. Your Abbottphobia really is twisting you. Calling your PM a 'moron' really must make you feel superior.

Indeed JKJ.
And education in a so called democracy, is a right rather than a salable commodity. At least it was, when there was still a light on the hill!
The outstanding difference between us the UK and the USA; both of the aforementioned have a bill of rights!
For all the good it has done for those innocents, already put to death in over-crowed American prisons; now being emptied somewhat, by DNA evidence that is proving many of the incarcerated; put there by fatuous, fundamentally flawed, extremely indolent law enforcement, were innocent of the charges all along!
As for the Middle East, even there, even among tinpot potentates, they're beginning to understand; there is no such thing as a good terrorist!
Cheers, Rhrosty.

Tch, Tch...runner....further spewing the hatred is not becoming for one such as yourself who claims Christian ethics.

as in...

"fits your perverted and distorted narrative well Poirot..."

That's not very nice.

"...Calling your PM a 'moron' really must make you feel superior."

Have I actually called Mr Abbott a "moron"?

The "moron" insult is usually accompanied by the moniker "individual" around here.

Poirot is more likely to employ a more sophisticated variety of criticism.

Can you post a link to where I called Abbott a moron?

Great article. This particular government is full of ironies, but don't seem to get it.

Dismissing scientific evidence and any kind of academic research or findings yet insisting they want Australia's universities to get up there with the 100 top in the world. It would be truly funny if not so very sad. But then, as Pyne so well articulated, education is Australia's third biggest export earner. So it isn't really about educating Australians or indeed research, it is about selling units of education to overseas students.

And now this lot who went into the election to dismantle 18C of the discrimination act, because of 'free speech' ends up enacting the most draconian anti libertarian laws in any of the Western democracies. It is truly bizarre. What exactly are we now 'fighting' for? Clearly not to live in a free democratic nation.

I quite like the seeming contrariness of being a socially libertarian and an economic socialist. The whole left right division is so outdated and limiting.

"And now this lot who went into the election to dismantle 18C of the discrimination act, because of 'free speech' ends up enacting the most draconian anti libertarian laws in any of the Western democracies. It is truly bizarre. What exactly are we now 'fighting' for? Clearly not to live in a free democratic nation."

Oh, so well put, Yvonne...the irony of it all!

Yvonne,
We're fighting for "social cohesion" and solidarity with Muslims here by dropping high explosives on Muslims in Iraq as well as the right to wear a Burqa while simultaneously fighting against the right to wear a Burqa.
As I said before, I don't believe a word Abbott and Shorten say but I believe everything ISIS say, I'm starting to feel that creeping dread I felt all the time in the latter half of the Howard regime.

Jay, you must be really sympathetic to ISIS then. They are most fervently for 'social cohesion'. Be like us and think like us, if not, leave, or get killed. Hey, sounds familiar.....hearing these kind of sentiments on the streets in Australia. The actions are not quite beheadings yet, but certainly physical attacks, threats and vandalizing of property.

Scary how the vast majority of people who are quite comfortable about who they are and don't require everybody to be carbon copies of themselves get caught up in the very ugly and dangerous bun fight of extremist groups who want everybody to be and think exactly the same as themselves.