The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Winning the war against Internet censorship > Comments

Winning the war against Internet censorship : Comments

By David Jackmanson, published 17/11/2008

There are solutions to the problem of objectionable content on the Internet other than centralised censorship.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Col Rouge blames "the left" for being in favour of restricting free speech. He's right that it has become quite common for people claiming to be on the Left to be in favour of actively suppressing the views of people with whom they do not agree.

My difference with you on this is that I don't regard these people as genuine left-wingers. As a left-winger myself, I see the ideology of these people as quite reactionary. Their views are best characterized as "pseudo left".

In the case of the current attempt to censor the internet, the person who launched the whole campaign for this happens to be none other than Clive Hamilton. I've written a post detailing Hamilton's involvement here: http://strangetimes.lastsuperpower.net/?p=150

Fortunately with regard to the internet censorship issue, there's been a healthy tendency for many who hold pseudo-left views on other topics, to take a much better stand. I'm glad about that, we need to have as many people on side as possible. Nevertheless, as far as I can see, Clive Hamilton's role in the whole affair has remained unmentioned. The focus has instead been on the dreaded "Christian Right", who in fact only began lobbying over the issue after Hamilton and the Australia Institute had made a big media splash in 2003 and called for mandatory ISP-level filtering. Howard, restricted himself to a bit of sympathetic gesturing and the offer of free internet filters for those who wanted them. Not so with Rudd, as we all know.

I guess that internet censorship is a real life issue which can't help but arouse the ire of young pseudo-leftists who have grown up with the internet. Here's a case in which they themselves could lose some of the freedom that they have always taken for granted. (And they probably like their porn too..).
Posted by keza, Monday, 17 November 2008 6:54:43 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, I always tought Rudd was a holy-roller wowser and he has now proven it. Sadly, far from looking after "the working man" (whoever he may be) Labor has increasingly been dominated by wet behind the ears intellectuals who think they alone have the nouse to make intelligent decisions. This attempt to have a bunch of clergymen and other assorted wowsers tell us what we can and cannot access on the net is a typical stunt born out of their need to try and control every aspect of our lives.

However, dropping my blood pressure a few psi I can offer something constructive and here it is: http://nocleanfeed.com/takeaction.html is a website dedicated to collecting signatures on an online petition to tell the Government to back off. You just join (quick and painless)enter your vote and the job is done. There are also links and email and snail mail addresses of some key politicians who you could also write to if you so desire.

It may be water off the duck's back but if enough people scream loudly enough Rudd will listen as the only thing he hates more than porn is anything likely to cost him votes. Remember his majority isn't that great -a helluva lot of the seats Labor won at the last election are held by pretty skinny margins and it wouldn't take much of a swing to make him a one-term Prime Minister.

Here's hoping sanity will prevail and this nonsense will be allowed to sink quietly into richly deserved oblivion.
Posted by madmick, Monday, 17 November 2008 9:11:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A very thoughtful article, thanks David Jackmanson.

I was horrified to learn from keza that Clive Hamilton and the Australia Institute have been pushing for this outrageous law. Whilst I generally agree with the Australia Institute and even agree that there is too much emphasis on sexuality these days, I think it is another matter for them to support this crude and costly form of censorship entailing such obvious dangers to free speech.

I have e-mailed them to let me know of my feelings and hope that they will come to their senses on this.
Posted by daggett, Tuesday, 18 November 2008 1:57:31 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes David, there are alternatives.

But not to a Prime Minister who sees himself as God's right arm. He wouldn't use the internet himself so wouldn't know what it has to offer, good or bad.

This Rudd guy has one major flaw. He's religious. We must be sure we never again elect anyone with religious convictions as they take their election as a sign from that non existent deity to do what they think they should. Not what we want.
Posted by RobbyH, Tuesday, 18 November 2008 2:54:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Johnj” Thanks guys, these gave me the biggest laughs I've had all week.”

That was part of my intended objective : - )

Keza… whilst our declared politics might differ, I am pleased to see we both support the notion of freedom of the individual in their use of speech and the internet.

A simple analogy,

Keza likes strawberry icecream,

I prefer blue berry icecream.

Krudd is intent on us not being allowed to taste icecream, except from his van –

and the only flavor on offer is

beige.

Freedom to read what we choose is as fundamental as freedom of speech and freedom of association.

Margaret Thatcher wrote “To be free is better than to be unfree - always. Any politician who suggests the opposite should be treated as suspect."

Internet censorship is a direct attack upon individual freedom.

And MT is right, Krudd & Co are acting ‘suspiciously’.
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 18 November 2008 9:46:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Its not only about censoring porn, anything deemed "illegal" will be off limits. No longer will Australians have the right to understand any subject the govt deems illegal, such as Euthanasia, medical marijuana,anorexia, pornography, and no doubt atheism. Such is the level of influence of religious lobbyists over this prime minister.

Be scared very scared, no longer are we a democracy , we are well on our way to becoming a totalitarian state.
This issue needs to be maintained, in the media,to put pressure on Mr Rudd to reverse this ridiculous decision, and more importantly for him to disclose just whom he takes advise from in such matters.
Posted by Your Domestic Bliss, Wednesday, 19 November 2008 3:24:36 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy