Multiculturalism versus freedom of speech

Under Multiculturalism, the Anzacs and our founding fathers would be considered Thought Criminals

Under Multiculturalism, the Anzacs and our founding fathers would be considered Thought Criminals

The political ideology of Multiculturalism is intrinsically tied to the denial of freedom of speech. Whilst this statement may appear to ludicrous to anyone who has gone through twelve years of brainwashing in schools dominated by Multiculturalist teachers, it only appears that way because they haven’t been taught to analyse the ramifications of Multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism teaches that all cultures and races are equal, and that all peoples should be intertwined — although, in truth, the Multiculturalists concentrate their designs on wealthy white Western countries. However, the Multiculturalists’ promotion of large-scale Third World immigration inevitably causes community tensions, social dislocation, and national discord. Therefore, in order to continue with their ideological plans, the Multiculturalists ban opposing views, often dressing up their Police State tactics as an attempt to combat “hate speech”.

Flawed and subjective
The whole notion of “hate speech” is flawed; it is a subjective issue, it is a matter of opinion. Just as one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist, one man’s free speech is another man’s hate speech. So-called “hate crimes” are all about the thoughts of the accused; voicing one’s opinion can be a “hate crime” (or “thought crime”), thus making one a “thought criminal”.

In reality, the designation of “hate speech” is just a way of demonising and delegitimising your political opponents. The concept of “hate speech” comes from the Left, the same side of politics that gave us oppressive Socialism and dictatorial Communism; whilst oppressive behaviour can appear on the Right as well, it is far less common (due to the conservative mind-set of allowing free speech and fair play).

“Hate speech” laws are a tool of the Left
It is not a coincidence that all of the “hate speech” laws favour Leftist causes:

1) Opposing Third World immigration and racial miscegenation becomes “racial hatred”.

2) Opposing homosexuality and homosexual marriages becomes “homophobia”. Being against other sexual perversions would no doubt earn one the label of “hater” as well.

3) Opposing the spread of Islamification earns any Islam-wary person the title of “Islamophobe” (also spelt as “Islamaphobe”).

Rarely are questions raised about the other side of the cultural coin:

1) Marxist Communism led to the deaths of at least 100 million people, so why isn’t the promotion of Communism deemed “hate speech”?

2) Many Multiculturalists and Globalists spew forth slander and political bile against Nationalism, so why isn’t that called “hate speech”?

3) Loads of anti-traditionalists and atheists denigrate Christianity, often vilifying and ridiculing Christians, so why isn’t that called “hate speech”?

4) White people are often slandered and vilified in the mainstream media, so why isn’t that called “racial hatred”?

Attacking patriotic or traditional values is deemed fair game and freedom of speech, but if anyone dares to voice an opinion against the “sacred cows” of the Left then they are slandered as “haters”, “fascists” or “racists”, deemed to be guilty of “hate speech”, with “offenders” being liable to be fined and/or jailed.

If someone were to burn a Koran in their own backyard and video the event for use on the internet, that would be considered a “hate crime”, but if someone else were to photograph Jesus on a crucifix submerged in the photographer’s own urine, then that would be considered “art”.

For those who don’t recall, those two incidents actually happened. John Salvesen was charged by police in Denmark for burning a Koran, whilst Andres Serrano (an African-Cuban born in New York) displayed as “art” a photo of Jesus Christ submerged in Serrano’s urine.

The hypocrisy of the so-called “hate speech” laws is astounding

The hypocrisy of the so-called “hate speech” laws is astounding (a point illustrated by this cartoon)

The two-faced nature of the Multiculturalist political laws was especially obvious in the Danish case, as a Danish artist had previously burnt a Bible on public television without any legal consequences. The hypocrisy of the so-called “hate speech” laws is astounding.

In England two people were arrested over a video of a Koran being burnt “for posting videos or images likely to cause racial hatred”. Maybe if they submerged the Koran in their own urine, then it could have been called “art”?

The Salvesen case ended when a coalition of Danish politicians, including Danish patriots, had the blasphemy section removed from the law. However, Denmark still has a “racial hatred” law, which they use against political patriots and speakers of racial truths.

These “racial hatred” laws are political laws; they are laws designed to enforce the political ideology of Multiculturalism. They are laws designed to enforce a particular political point of view by intimidating and oppressing the political opponents of Multiculturalism and Third World immigration. If similar “hate” laws were to be enacted against the Left, for example a law against the burning of the national flag, or another making it illegal to denigrate Christianity, then the Left would be in an uproar, screaming against “fascism”.

When some Australian patriots engaged in some street theatre, pretending to kill an effigy of an Arab terrorist, they were charged under the racial vilification laws. If Leftist activists did something similar, such as pretending to kill an effigy of a fat capitalist, it would just be deemed “harmless theatre”. The Left has the political and legal Establishment in its thrall (in effect, the activist Leftist radical act as the “boot boys” of the Establishment, and are given a lot more latitude than anyone else). When the Left criticise opponent groups, it’s called “art” or “political debate”, but when patriots do it, it’s called “hate speech”,

There is a wide range of “Human Rights” commissions in various countries, all tasked with the mission to stomp down on those who are “politically incorrect” — these star chambers are not committed to our democratic ideals; in fact, they have more in common with Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany than they do with democratic Australia.

Leftist political intimidation and violence
The political misuse of the legal system as a way of oppressing political opponents is not the only way that the fascists of the Left operate. Leftists also use intimidation and violence to stop people from publicly giving an opposing view. Such tactics are primarily those of the Left. As Star Parker, an African-American conservative, says: “Intolerance, at times exploding into violence, is spreading throughout our society. And it’s coming from the political left.”

Leftists have been so indoctrinated with their flawed ideas that they find it hard to even imagine that anyone opposing them has a valid opinion; conservative points of view are routinely demonised in the Leftist-dominated mainstream media and in Leftist-dominated schools — after being brainwashed by Leftists for six years in primary school, six years in secondary school, and (for some) another three or four years at university, it is little wonder that uncritical Leftist puppets are being churned out by the education system, angry and ready to fight their “demons”.

In Australia and America people have been attacked just for going to a venue to listen to conservative speakers, whether it be Lauren Southern, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, or Milo Yiannopoulos. Leftist thugs have blocked streets and assaulted people in an attempt to ensure that they didn’t attend patriotic rallies. Then these black-shirted neo-fascist Leftist stormtroopers have the audacity to call patriots “fascists” (a clear case of psychological projection, if ever there was one).

The Anzacs and our founding fathers would be considered Thought Criminals
It is simply amazing that the men who created the foundations of democracy in Australia would now be considered “haters”, “fascists” and “racists”. It is even more incredible that the Australian soldiers who fought at Anzac Cove, and those who fought against Fascism and Nazism, would nowadays be called “Fascists” and “Nazis” because they were overwhelmingly supportive of the White Australia Policy.

If the founders of the Australian nation were alive today, they would be persecuted by the so-called “Human Rights” industry for being “racists”, or they would be dragged through the courts for “hate speech”. Similarly, if the Anzacs of the First World War were alive today, they would be hunted down and prosecuted by the Multiculturalists for “racial and religious vilification”. Under Multiculturalism, the Anzacs and our founding fathers would be considered Thought Criminals.

The democratic nations of the West fought against the Nazis and Fascists during the Second World War, in part at least because we were against people having to live in a Police State. Yet, the new Multiculturalist regimes of the West have brought the democratic nations further down the path of having a Police State than we ever faced in peacetime in the 20th or 21st centuries.

The Multiculturalist Police State
People can’t voice unfashionable opinions in public without fear of losing their jobs, or even of being fined or jailed (all in the interests of “fighting racial or religious hatred”). “Unfashionable opinions” are those points of view which are frowned upon by the Globalist political elite currently dominating the nation’s Establishment. Even outside of political opinions, the Multiculturalists have furthered the Police State, with ordinary people being pulled over by the police for random checks (all in the interests of “road safety”, of course), whilst the invasiveness of airport security is legendary (all in the interests of “public safety”, naturally). The right to own firearms has been severely curtailed, and — in various places — it is illegal for citizens to own firearms for the purpose of self-defence; in some states, the law has even removed the right of people to not give their names to police if not under arrest (all in the interests of “fighting crime” and having an “orderly society”).

Old war movies used to depict incidents of German police stopping people in the street and demanding “Papers! Show us your papers!” — such scenes were viewed as typical of the terrible conditions of living in a Police State; but nowadays police stop drivers on the road all the time, as well as detaining innocent citizens in the street and demanding their identification documents (this seems to especially happen to photographers).

If the Allied soldiers, sailors, and pilots who fought against Hitler, Mussolin, and Tojo could see the state of things today, they would be turning in their graves. The current state of affairs is exactly the sort of thing that our military heroes went to war against; they fought and died to not have a Police State, but — under the Multiculturalists — that’s exactly where we are heading. Indeed, we already live in a partial Police State, and it should be expected that things will only get worse.

Against Multiculturalism, for democracy
The white peoples of the West spent hundreds of years, if not thousands of years, slowly creating the democracies of the West. We built our democracies so that we can have freedom of speech, freedom of movement, a say in the running of our own communities, and live a free life without undue interference from government. We wanted what used to be called “a white man’s land”, a land of individual rights and freedom.

But now all of that is being changed, thanks to the vast majority of Multiculturalists with their belief in government overreach, police despotism, and state regulation of political opinions. They do it because they can; they do it because they have the power to assert their political will over the public; in effect, the Multiculturalists believe that “might is right”.

If we are to regain our democracy, then we must overthrow the rule of the Multiculturalists, and win back our freedoms.

References and further reading:
Star Parker, Liberal fight against freedom turns violent, Town Hall, 24 May 2017

Daryl McCann, How the Left turned Free Speech into Hate Speech, Quadrant, 16th January 2019

A report from the Reclaim Australia Rally, Melbourne, July 2015, Australian Protectionist Party, 3 October 2015

Support the Bendigo victims of Multiculturalist fascism, Australian Protectionist Party, 5 March 2017

Patriots convicted for criticizing Islam, Australian Protectionist Party, 7 September 2017

The Sonia Kruger case shows that Australians need a guarantee for freedom of speech, Australian Protectionist Party, 26 February 2019

Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura, Danish man who burned Quran is prosecuted for blasphemy, New York Times, 23 February 2017

Czarina Nicole Ong, Denmark repeals Blasphemy Law after 334 years, The Christian Post, 2 June 2017

Michael Doherty, Man and woman arrested for Koran-burning videos, Opposing Views, 12 June 2017

Rasmus Paludan (advokat), Wikipedia [Danish language Wikipedia page re. Salvesen’s lawyer; it has more information than the English version]

Immersions (Piss Christ): Andres Serrano, 1987, 100 Photos (Time magazine)

Piss Christ, Wikipedia

Speak Your Mind