On the march by far right wing extremists and transphobes and the counter-protests [Content Warning: hate, discrimination, violence, extremism]

PS Just days after the extremist parade in my home state, a pack of pseudo-christian extremist (SBS) thugs violently (TND) assaulted (TG) peaceful trans-rights activists on the opposite side of a street to where a notorious right wing politician was speaking - who condemned the violence but grossly misrepresented the actions of the trans-rights protestors. Prime Minister Albanese must condemn this violence. 

PPS Later violence by this transhater's supporters included violence against Members of Parliament in Australia and New Zealand - the latter by a motorcycle that knocked the MP down on a pedestrian crossing.
From my news summary post: 

just days after the extremist parade in my home state, a pack of pseudo-christian extremist (SBS) thugs (QN) violently (TND) assaulted (TG) peaceful trans-rights activists on the opposite side of a street to where a notorious right wing politician was speaking - who condemned the violence but grossly misrepresented the actions of the trans-rights protestors. Prime Minister Albanese must condemn this violence - see also here (TND), here (TG), here (Star), here (Star), here (Star), a NZ focused article which states there is historical precedent for public safety trumping so-called free (hate) speech here (TC), “let’s counteract hysteria by dispelling gender diversity myths” (The West Australian), and videos were circulated on social media prior to the planned massive ambush URGING VIOLENCE (TG);   a Tasmanian newspaper “has printed a front-page apology for publishing an anti-trans letter to the editor that was later found to be fabricated” (QN);      an Indigenous Senator who was being an outstanding ally at a trans-hate rally was “pulverised” by two trans-haters and several police - see here (SBS), here (TND), here (QN), here (TG), and concerns about her treatment were expressed by the Minister for Indigenous Australians (TG);      the reality of children’s sport that include trans competitors (M);

The following is from an email I have sent to my local MPs on the above captioned matter. I have edited it to remove reference to n___s, as that wording may be triggering complaints.

***

Dear Member for _,

Further to my previous emails on this subject, I wish to write again summarising my considerations and views on the march of far rights extremists who threw "n___ salutes" in front of our Parliament. I have taken into consideration my previous emails and reports from SBS here, The Guardian here, The New Daily here (on the move to expel a notorious transphobic Liberal MP), comments I heard on ABC Radio on the morning of Monday 20th March, and The New Daily here (on the fast tracking of a legislative ban on the nazi salute). Other relevant links are provided below.

Firstly, I consider violence unacceptable - except in the defence of life. I was Buddhist for over three decades of my life, and have always admired the adherents of non-violent approaches and appreciated the discipline and deep thought of their approaches. I am also the survivor of multiple forms of physical and other violence, and thus have personal awareness of the effects of such.

I am therefore always appalled when people advocate for or joke about actions such as "punch a n___ in the face" - it:

• is a breach of my principles,
  
• it is people dragging themselves down to the level of what they are trying to change (much as the death penalty demonstrates a society's lack of respect for life, and thus is inherently counter-productive), and
  
• it does not help achieve the aims being sought (there is ample evidence - e.g., by Erica Chenoweth and Maria J Stephens [here] - on the advantages of nonviolent approaches over violent).

Despite that, from a human point of view, the (reactive, unnuanced and, frankly, often immature) desire to resort to such actions is understandable - those RWEs and other haters marching on Saturday 18th March were, after all, in effect advocating for the death of trans and gender diverse people (their appalling sign started with "destroy" - and some of the US murders of TGD people in 2022 have been reported here, for instance). I consider it naive to claim otherwise - and I note that the march comes after nearly a decade of trans and gender diverse (TGD, including nonbinary) people being targeted - including by inflammatory hate speech likely to incite crimes of violence - by conservative national governments and their associates, and that that period included TGD people being thrown under a bus during the Equal Marriage postal plebiscite.

As the survivor of child sexual assault, I can also understand the anger of people at the c_______ church, which has become notorious for protecting child abusers.

In both cases, prompt demonstrations of clear, unambiguous support is of great value to victim-survivors, and thus Premier Andrews' statements on Sunday 19th March were of great comfort and value, but the absolute helplessness felt by TGD people over such existential threats is real, and damaging both to us victims (we are all harmed when one of ours is attacked - psychologically, by loss of security, if nothing else) and more broadly to our democracy and society.

Awareness of that is something I consider police need to be aware of and to take into consideration when performing their duties, in order for their conduct to be effective and adequately professional. 

That leads me to my next point: police and protests.

When I was a child my mother took me in to the city on a day of one of the anti-Vietnam War protests (this was coincidental, not intentional), and I recall being absolutely terrified by the noise and vehemence of those marching. As an adult, I can understand that the anger was not directed at me, but as a child I wasn't able to make that distinction - and the distinction is important. I did not feel physically threatened - emotionally and aurally overwhelmed yes, but not physically threatened.

I understand the desire for peace and order - and, being human, also want a peaceful and safe life. However, sometimes noisy or disruptive nonviolent marches are necessary for the sake of society - for instance, the aforementioned marches against the Vietnam war, more recent protests against the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq (which the Defence Minister recently said [here, on The Guardian] were vindicated), the 1965 freedom ride (here, on AIATSIS), and the campaign for an eight hour day (see here, on Wikipedia). Any actions taken to protect people's right to quiet enjoyment by limiting or managing such protests needs to be consistent (i.e., applied without bigotry or bias - and must especially be free of unconscious bias, often disguised as "values"), and applied with full, conscious awareness and acknowledgement of the vital role dissent has in all democracies.

Further to that, there are, in my opinion, "good" and "bad" marches.

• "Good" marches or public actions include those I have mentioned already, as well as actions seeking to cause action against the existential climate crisis the human species is facing; 
• "Bad" marches include the anti-lockdown marches, the RWE marches in the USA, and Saturday 18th March event - which was unacceptable on two grounds - the inclusion of nazis (which also has an antisemitic aspect), and the life threatening transphobia.

I am wary of any person who claims otherwise.

Now, I mentioned in my emails that I wanted to wait before responding properly. As a result of that, I now know:

• there apparently were half a dozen groups involved, and some either did not communicate with police, or changed their plans after doing so. I cannot really comment on that, other than acknowledging the complexity, as I do not know the details (e.g., were the problem groups protestors or counter-protestors, and were any counter-protest groups of concern pro-trans or anti-fascist?), but I have referred to some reported observations below.
  The important point here is decisions around managing public protests need to adequately balance the broader needs of society (such as righting injustices, or - in the case of climate crisis events - ensuring the survival of humanity) as well as public order. This balance is acknowledged in Clause 15 (3) of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, which reflects Article 19 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights that Australia ratified on 13th August, 1980:
  

  (3)  Special duties and responsibilities are attached to the right of freedom of expression and the right may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary—

  (a)  to respect the rights and reputation of other persons; or

  (b)  for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality.

  
  In much the same way that some significant court decisions have been published to show the nuanced decision making involved, it may be worth some publicity to promote awareness of police consideration of the benefits and rights of public protest. Avoiding creating any image of being partisan would be a challenge, but I consider that likely manageable. (In fact, many people may not know that police have themselves gone on strike for improved pay and conditions - in 1923 [see here, here, and here - I couldn't find any mention of that on the Victoria Police website, perhaps understandably].)
  
• There have been past problems with Victoria Police (e.g., this use of a hate symbol by a police officer at a protest some years ago), and their standing is currently quite poor with my communities and the LGBTIQA+ communities. However, as I have acknowledged elsewhere, force command has recently demonstrated good will towards the LGBTIQA+ communities by dismissing a member who was biased.
  
• Further to that last point, ABC Radio on the morning of Monday 20th March reported the Secretary of the Victoria Police Association stated many members had contacted him to express their distress at not being able to take action against those making n___ salutes. If so, that could be quite beneficial to accomplishing effective change on that matter. It is also understandable that they would be unhappy, as the optics of police appearing to protect n___s and moving those n___s towards trans rights activists was utterly, utterly dreadful.
  

Further to that, Victoria Police also need to be prepared to support being able to action against those transphobic persons trying to drive TGD people to suicide.

Furthermore, there have been concerns about police decisions on Saturday 18th March, 2023.

The most specific statement of concerns I have found was published by Melbourne Activist Legal Support (MALS) at https://mals.au/2023/03/20/statement-of-concern-policing-of-opposing-anti-trans-rally-trans-rights-rallies, and includes the following:

Victoria Police have obligations under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act (2006) to protect the rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of association (Section 16), as well as obligations to uphold Article 21 of the International Covenant of Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR). Importantly, both assemblies and counter-demonstrations (when one assembly takes place to express opposition to another) fall within the scope of the protection of Article 21. Police must, in principle, take a content-neutral approach to counter-demonstrations and these approaches must not be based on the identity of the participants or their relationship with the authorities. The recognition of the right of peaceful assembly imposes an obligation on police to respect and ensure its exercise without discrimination (see UNHRC General comment No. 37 (2020) on the right of peaceful assembly (paragraphs 8,-9, 21, 25-26).

Victoria Police commonly place cordons and restrict opposing groups from making direct physical contact when policing opposing assemblies. However, in doing so, police must ensure that their tactics and operational measures do not result in discrimination in the enjoyment of the right of peaceful assembly, for example, on the basis of race, colour, ethnicity, age, sex, language, property, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity, or other status.  (UNHRC General comment No. 37 (2020) paragraph 25).

Particular efforts must be made to ensure the equal and effective facilitation and protection of the right of peaceful assembly of individuals who are members of groups that are or have been subjected to discrimination or that may face particular challenges in participating in assemblies (UNHRC General comment No. 37 (2020) paragraph 25).

Generally, human rights jurisprudence accepts that the use of flags, uniforms, signs, and banners is to be regarded as a legitimate form of expression that should not be restricted, even if such symbols are reminders of a painful past. However, in cases where such symbols are directly and predominantly associated with incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, appropriate restrictions should apply.[i]

Victoria prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity under the Equal Opportunity (Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation) Act 2000.

I hope the decision making of Victoria Police will be objectively, independently, and expertly reviewed, and appropriate recommendations - if any are necessary - made. In expressing that hope, whilst I agree with the summary of obligations I have quoted above, I am not in a position to comment on the accuracy of the rest of the MALS article.

I have written in previous emails about my concerns around the effects of society's expectations on police, and the need to provide additional positive health support - especially emotional and psychological, and to possibly think of rotating police through active duty and then something to balance out the interaction with communities, much as soldiers serve some time in the front line, and then recuperate in rear lines. My concern there is that values and opinions of those dealing with trauma can become more conservative or hard line. Such changes are of particular concern when dealing with situations that may not involve obvious physical threats - such as some forms of domestic violence, and the discrimination encountered by cisgender women and minorities.

I will not attempt to repeat the points of those emails here, but I consider the damage of service is a factor to be considered.

Another factor to be considered is what is known about right wing extremism.

The Legislative Council Legal and Social Issues Committee published "Inquiry into extremism in Victoria" in August 2022 (ISBN 978 1 922882 05 9, for the PDF version). I consider the following from that report are all relevant to consideration of the matters I am writing about:

FINDING 1: The language used to describe any form of extremism is important and should be considered carefully.

FINDING 2: The present threat of violence from far‑left extremism is not equivalent to the present threat of violence from far‑right extremism, but the domestic violent extremism threat landscape is continually evolving and changing.

FINDING 9: Far‑right extremism is not new in Australia or Victoria, but there has been a re‑emergence of far‑right extremism, most notably from 2015 and 2016 onwards.

RECOMMENDATION 1: That the Victorian Government and Members of Parliament seek ways to build public trust in the Parliament, including developing measures to improve transparency. This should include investigating the potential benefits of introducing an integrity charter.

FINDING 12: Mainstream media has a critical role to play in the dissemination of accurate information during crises, as well as in reporting responsibly on the activities of far‑right extremist groups and individuals, and not creating negative stereotypes of specific communities.

FINDING 13: Reporting of extremist activities, groups and individuals should be subject to strong media guidelines to minimise amplification of extremist propaganda that benefits or platforms extremist movements.

FINDING 18: Far‑right extremism poses a threat to democracy. Strengthening democratic processes and increasing transparency by providing information to the public about political processes and practices is an important part of mitigating this threat.

FINDING 19: Responses to extremism need to avoid measures that curtail civil liberties in a disproportionate manner.

FINDING 21: Left‑wing aligned (or perceived to be left‑wing aligned) politicians and public figures have been targeted by far‑right extremist groups and individuals.

FINDING 22: Racism and racist scapegoating, Islamophobia and antisemitism are common elements of far‑right extremist ideologies, messaging and activities.

FINDING 23: When public and elected figures accept racist rhetoric and action this blurs the lines between what is acceptable and what is not in the community and leads to risks that multicultural communities will be targeted.

FINDING 24: Evidence from stakeholders suggests that far‑right extremism can be gendered, and that misogyny and anti‑feminist sentiment are common but not necessarily well understood features of far‑right extremist movements.

RECOMMENDATION 2: That the Government consider funding research investigating the links between extremism and family violence, anti‑women or anti‑feminist sentiment, and masculinity to identify further opportunities for counter‑extremism measures.

FINDING 25: Both real and perceived threats from far‑right extremist groups cause harm to the LGBTQIA+ community in Victoria. Government measures to support these communities are important.

FINDING 35: Countering extremism is a whole‑of‑society issue. Governments and law enforcement can and should play a proactive role in the process of countering extremism, however, communities need to be supported with resources to ensure they have the capacity to effectively participate.

FINDING 38: Anti‑racism public education campaigns and education programs that teach respect and appreciation for multiculturalism are important for improving social cohesion in Victoria.

FINDING 39: Education about the Holocaust is particularly important for understanding some of the consequences of racism and vilification throughout history and should have ongoing inclusion in the Victorian school curriculum.

RECOMMENDATION 7: That the Victorian Government support the ongoing provision of existing anti‑racism education programs and actively seek to improve and increase the provision of such programs in the community.

FINDING 40: Digital and critical literacy are essential skills for young people to navigate the internet safely, to develop resistance to the influence of extremist messaging and to analyse the quality of information they are exposed to.

RECOMMENDATION 8: The Victorian Government should review the digital and critical literacy skills taught via the primary and secondary school curriculum to identify opportunities for improvement and expansion.

FINDING 42: While online content regulation sits beyond the purview of state governments, the Committee reiterates the value of the Christchurch Call and the measures it outlines with regard to violent extremist and terrorist content.

FINDING 44: Access to firearms obtained legally or illegally by members of far‑right extremist groups poses potential risks to the community and is of significant concern.

FINDING 46: Proscription of terrorist organisations can be a useful tool for deterring the activities of far‑right extremist groups which advocate for violence, but there is a balance to be met between keeping communities safe and potentially increasing the profile of these groups.

RECOMMENDATION 12: That the Victorian Government advocate to the Commonwealth Government for the proscription of extremist organisations active in Victoria which clearly meet the legal tests for engaging in preparing, planning, assisting or fostering the doing of a terrorist act, or advocating the doing of a terrorist act.

I have highlighted findings and recommendations that I consider of especial significance. One addition I would make to those is that Recommendation 7 be extended to include LGBTIQA+ communities and cisgender women, religions including Judaism, and disabilities or other differences.

Having covered that material - and I apologise for the length of the preceding, but I consider it was necessary, where to from here? 

As a first point, it must be understood that the treatment of minorities is society's equivalent of the mining world's "canary in the coal mine" - what happens to us is an indicator of what could happen to others soon. Early and definitive action is necessary against fascism in general, and, based on this person's experience, n___s in particular - for the sake of TGD people, cisgender women, Jewish people, people with disabilities, and others. This is perhaps most famously portrayed in the Martin Niemöller "poem", which I have included near the end of this email (I used the version from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum - see here). That is written about 1930s Germany, but events over the last decade or so in the USA show it is also stumbling along a similar path. As part of action against RWE in its various forms, firm and effective action against the open activity of n___s and transphobes is vitally necessary.

The Andrews Government has a long history of taking such action, and has clearly committed to doing so again. I commend and support this action - and I consider it vital that activists do actively support actions that are good, even if those activists consider the actions may not be perfect. We do not live in a perfect world, and, as Voltaire said, “the best is the enemy of the good” (often translated as “the perfect is the enemy of the good”). Progress is often small steps - but the first of those steps must be taken by all.

The Andrews government also has an excellent history of consultation with those directly affected; that will be essential in this instance as well - and I am confident that such will happen.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

As a final point: this is a vital matter not only for Victoria, but for all of Australia, and it behoves the Albanese government to take the matter as seriously, actively and energetically as the Andrews government.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

• this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Finally, remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing.