Indeed – it is difficult to understand how some of the proposals put forward by the Greens ‘gained traction’ within that party in the first place. (Yes the Murdoch press has been conducting a blatant campaign against the Greens; but surely opposition to censorship is a ‘fundamental’…) Given the party’s location on the relative Left, the threat censorship has historically posed to the Left itself, and the possibility therefore of setting a dangerous precedent, one would have expected a more cautious approach on the part of the Greens as well.
And again without censorship, principles of honourable journalism ought to be promoted. Publications which maintain the pretence of presenting opinions, events and policy authentically and inclusively ought attract robust and high-profile public criticism where they fail to live up to their own self-proclaimed standards.
These issues need to be considered in depth in the coming media review; and Labor would be well-advised to implement a robust policy - not just half-measures.
The same principle ought to apply to both socially conservative and liberal faith communities – which on the principle of voluntary and free association determine their own internal rules and doctrines.
But are all cultures compatible in all contexts and on any scale?; And should the contention they are not attract the tremendous stigma involved with the charge of ‘racism’?
Even in socialist
But yes: Mondon is correct to infer that these debates will be exploited by the powerful. During the 1980s the West supported the Mujahideen against the Soviets in
Let us maintain the principles of liberal democratic pluralism, including a meaningfully participatory, inclusive and authentic public sphere. But let us also be aware of the dangers. Liberal pluralism (and tolerant/harmonious multiculturalism) is not necessarily eternal and unassailable. The future depends upon the political and cultural choices we make now.