I’m in two minds about the possible repeal of section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act because of its implications for my column.
On the one hand, with 18c still in force, I feel I would be grossly offending the overwhelming majority of Australians by, for example, only referring to Christine Milne as “quite demented.” And leaving it at that.
On the other hand, if George Brandis gets his way and 18c is repealed, I could avoid grossly offending the majority by calling a spade a spade. That is, I would feel compelled to pull out all stops and, for example, describe Milne as “an obnoxious, raving loony with Stalinist tendencies that even Putin would baulk at owning up to, bent on replacing our Western civilisation with a Godless totalitarian Green ideology which will inevitably lead to an Islamist takeover.” And, if I were to describe Milne in this way once 18c was repealed (and I’m not going to until it is), this would not in the least be offensive to the vast number of Australians, it seems to me.
In fact, they would think it to be quite a sensible appraisal. And with the new honour systems in place it might even earn me a knighthood. Only the Green-Left commissars, with their paltry 8 percent of the vote, might possibly feel the need to whinge, but that should not concern the sane amongst us.
The problem is, if 18c was repealed, I would feel the need in the interests of fair and balanced reporting to use at least the 35 words (and a lot more) I used above in one sentence to give justice to any political profile of anyone in the Green-Left leadership. This would be an admittedly unfair burden on the counter-Jihad cognoscenti: my readership. For, why would they bother wading through my lengthy descriptions just to confirm what was already perfectly obvious?
But free speech is a powerful force and I fear that, given a green light, I might not be able to contain myself.