The Prize for Supporting Women’s Rights: Expulsion in the Name of ‘Inclusion’

Commentary

A political observer might be surprised by the ability of the Liberal Party to condemn itself to a long period in the political wilderness. Although the reasons for this are complex, its inability (or unwillingness) to serve its conservative support base is a contributing factor.

This was most visibly demonstrated in the event that took place in Melbourne on March 18 when British women’s rights campaigner Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull addressed the Let Women Speak rally in Melbourne. The event protested against the participation of trans women in female sporting events and their use of women-only facilities.

Victorian Liberal MP, Moira Deeming, attended the rally and accompanied the British campaigner. The police separated a rival left-wing group of protestors from the Let Women Speak group.

However, a group of neo-Nazis, some of them wearing balaclavas, managed to occupy the space between the two groups and proceeded to perform the Nazi salute in front of the Parliament.

Deeming was summoned by the Victorian Opposition Leader, John Pesutto, who told her that he would move a motion to expel her from the parliamentary Liberal party for attending the event.

Pesutto indicated that his proposed action has nothing to do with an MP’s right to free speech but that her attendance at the event conflicted with the party’s principles and more comprehensive community values and that her membership in the party had become untenable.

He said in a statement: “Regardless of religious faith, race, sexual preference and identity, Victorians everywhere should know that the Liberal Party is inclusive and can be a voice for them.”

It is not clear whether he objected to the supposedly anti-trans message communicated by the Let Women Speak group or objected to the presence of an MP at a rally invaded by neo-Nazis. It is, however, certain that Deeming, in her maiden speech, expressed the hope that the government would pursue a common sense policy with regard to trans-Victorians.

Shut Down by All Sides

Pesutto’s reason for expelling Deeming, while politically expedient, is disingenuous because the view that the Liberal Party is “inclusive” obviously does not extend to people who harbour conservative views.

In May 2022, the Liberal Party in Victoria expelled Bernie Finn, mainly for committing the “crime” of expressing his satisfaction at the looming overturning of the Roe v Wade abortion decision in the United States.

And at the last federal election, a Liberal candidate, Katherine Deves, was vilified for her stance on gender fluidity.

The question of whether trans women should be allowed to compete in female sporting events has become a controversial issue. Critics claim that their participation in these competitions distorts the fairness of athletic events.

Nevertheless, the Victorian government has committed itself to protect the rights of trans-Victorians and regards their rights as non-negotiable.

People who are opposed to gender dysphoria legislation are routinely dismissed as “homophobic”, and their views are neither respected nor tolerated.

The presence of the neo-Nazi group at the event caused the Victorian Attorney-General, Jaclyn Symes, to announce that, as a matter of urgency, the Victorian anti-vilification law would be amended to outlaw the Nazi salute.

She confidently claimed that “Victorians have zero tolerance of this behaviour, and so do we.”

Considering Pesutto’s response to Deeming’s attendance at the rally, such an amendment will have bipartisan support. The proposed legislation is deemed to strengthen the current anti-vilification law, which already outlaws the use of the Swastika.

Of course, the issue could have been dealt with by restating the policy of the government—or of the relevant political party—regretting the attendance of Deeming at the rally, but respecting her rights to freedom of association and free speech.

Public Debate Should Be Encouraged

Although it may be politically convenient to simply outlaw the Nazi salute, it could have the effect of sending the aberrant sentiments of Nazi sympathisers deeper to fester and infect.

When something happens that the illiberal brigade does not like, the government and political leaders robotically and inflexibly respond by demanding the expansion of the scope of the relevant legislation, regardless of the long-term cost to society.

While, occasionally, it may be appropriate to enlarge the scope of the legislation, a robotic interventionist approach would ultimately nurture the development of an intolerant society that restricts free speech rights and makes the government a moral crusader.

Hence, the cumulative effect of government interventions is to significantly shift the behaviour of people in the direction favoured by governments.

The Victorian rally had been organised to ascertain the views of women on the controversial gender dysphoria legislation adopted by the Parliament that allows even children to determine their own sex and access medical facilities to change their sex, even against the will of their parents.

If, as argued by the Victorian opposition leader, the views of Deeming conflict with the Liberal Party’s principles and wider community values, it behoves politicians to gauge the views of the majority of electors.

An unverified statement by politicians or the unchecked beliefs of party-affiliated apparatchiks will not achieve that purpose.

Surely, it is legitimate to discuss in the public forum the participation of trans women in, and fairness of, athletic events.

Similarly, a free society should tolerate, even encourage, a discussion of the extent to which the use of Nazi symbols should be banned from the public forum.

The Victorian government, in foreshadowing the strengthening of the vilification law, acts like a nudge state, the behaviour of which is zealously paternalistic.

Underlying that philosophy is the notion that politicians can make better decisions for citizens than those citizens could make for themselves when exercising their right to free speech.

The cost of virtue-signalling may well be a staggering loss of freedom and common sense.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.