The Regulators:
The new world war may just begin down under

You know, I used to be proud to be an Australian.

Sure, we've had problems with the dollar all my life, our economy isn't exactly the most vibrant in the world, and it feels at times that our government is a collection of "old boys" who never made it out of the playground.

With our politicians there's always been a sense that most of them grew up in that kind of "perfect family unit," with the Stoic, uncommunicative father, the doting house-wife mother and the speak-only-when-spoken-to idiom for the kids. You also get the feeling that their ideas on family life haven't progressed much past that point.

The trouble is that these politicians recognise the fact that kids today, or indeed people in general, already have far more choice than at any other time in the past, but they don't believe we have a right to it. They want to take these choices away from us. In America, the freedom to explore who you are is protected by the Bill of Rights, allowing people to decide for themselves what is good for themselves, to a degree. Australia has no such legislation.

Senators' Harradine and Alston have made a mockery of the idea of freedom of speech and self-exploration. With the passing of this legislation, Australian citizens have been reduced to the equivalent of the 50's schoolchild.

Their stated purpose for doing so? Protection of our children. As if this flimsy excuse weren't a thin veneer for imposing their personal values on the lives of every Australian, trampling roughshod over the ideals of individual self-determinism. In the same week as this legislation was pushed through parliament, another senator (also a strong supporter of the bill ) made the comment that "lesbian relationships are not normal," as defence of their attempts to ban screening of a daytime soap featuring a lesbian relationship.

If we really want to make the net safe for young people, then regulations to control ISPs' are not going to do it. Like everything else, regulation needs to begin at home, with parents actually parenting and rediscovering their children, rather than letting multimedia raise them. Any child who knows enough to want access to those proscribed materials will find it elsewhere, possibly in even less safe environments than on the 'net in their home. It's also not inconceivable that a smart child (one smart enough to use a search engine, for example) would be able to find renegade sites yet to be banned. And as for those children who accidentally view some prohibited material online, I can't believe that minimal accidental exposure to materials targeted by this legislation could have any long-term effects on the psyche - I first saw porn at age 10, on a field trip to a factory with my school, all walls adorned with simpering nudes. We didn't care. We giggled, pointed, and moved on.

I am a white, male, heterosexual. The only drug I indulge in is alcohol. I don't surf for porn now, although I've actively looked at it in the past. I'm in a loving de-facto relationship with no children. I'm in favour of gun control, but I play Carmageddon. I swear, but not profusely, and believe strongly in minority and women's rights. I'm interested in matters of spiritualism and sexuality. I find Much Ado About Nothing as funny as Billy Connelly, Monty Python or Bottom. I'm hardly depraved, sociopathic or amoral, just the opposite, in fact. I care deeply about many thorny issues in today's society, particularly those that concern social or racial injustice. I value the right to explore these eclectic areas of my nature, and resent these Senators' attempts to control my destiny by imposing their rigid, religiously-inspired values on my life.

What is at stake is the beginning of the end of free speech. Does your government value your right to free speech and expression, or would they take it away from you if they could? My guess is that free speech is now in a more tenuous position worldwide than it has been in more than two hundred years. The Australian government has been allowed to strip its citizens of one of the most fundamental human rights, cloaked in the form of child-protection. And we let them do it, because not enough people cared, or thought it was relevant to them.

I'm not about to speculate on which rights will be the next to go - or even if they ever will. I don't know that. My point is that it opens a door. It is also very possible that this action will have such wide reaching effects as to cripple our e-commerce sector and to make personal internet access too expensive for the average home.

It comes down to a question of freedom of speech and thought., not one of pornography. In the end, this legislation will not be able to protect the children that it seeks to defend, but may well signal the beginning of a trend by governments against self-determinism. It matters to you already, because you're online, and you've read this far. It's now up to us all to make it matter to the ones who will be online tomorrow.

__________

Kelsey Brookes works at the Computer Graphics College as a lecturer in sound and introductory computing for the net. He is also a trained opera singer, writes contempory music and performs as a singer and keyboard player in a cover band called Drill. Kelsey is 24, lives in Sydney, Australia and has moved far too many times to be considered even remotely grounded in the real world.

.

August 29, 2008