New South Wales Labor Premier Chris Minns has announced his willingness to
“impinge on people’s rights” in the name of preserving what he describes as “a harmonious community.”
Following recent “antisemitic” incidents in Sydney, Minns argued that stricter speech laws may be necessary to protect “multiculturalism” in Australia.
“We don’t have the free speech rules that they have in the United States. We’ve got a strict interpretation of hate speech in the state. If that needs to go further in a legislative sense, that’s exactly what I’ll do,” Minns stated.
He justified this potential infringement by framing it as his duty to protect a multicultural society, saying, “We just can’t put that in jeopardy because some horrific individuals decide to carry out antisemitic attacks on the streets of Sydney.”
The Premier admitted that his approach would encroach on personal freedoms but seemed undeterred. “I don’t do that lightly. It is impinging on people’s rights, but we cannot have a situation where, with impunity, someone can walk down the street sowing division amongst different communities and then gleefully go home whilst the rest of us are left with the implications,” he said.
Minns also seemingly criticized the United States’ commitment to free speech, asserting that such liberties threaten Australia’s multicultural model. “Australia doesn’t have the free speech laws that are in place in America, and for one very important reason—because we’ve developed a multicultural community where it doesn’t matter what your faith or your religion is, you must live side-by-side with your neighbour in peace,” Minns explained.
His remarks suggest that he views free speech not as a right to be upheld but as a potential threat to societal harmony. “If we need laws in place to protect what has been built over multiple decades and make sure that people feel safe in Australia, then that’s what we’ll do,” he added.
Minns further argued that conflicts from abroad must not be allowed to influence Australian communities, insisting, “We cannot have a situation where we are importing conflicts around the world onto the streets of Sydney and saying, ‘Well, it’s just inevitable because something happened on the other side of the world.’ That’s not going to be the case in Australia.”
While claiming to support multiculturalism, Minns acknowledged that his approach could place restrictions on the majority to address the actions of a few. “The way we hold our community together can’t rest on the worst actor in our community acting up and then all of us turning a blind eye. Multiculturalism will not survive like that,” he concluded.
Free speech advocates have said Minns’ proposal as an alarming erosion of free speech rights under the guise of community protection. His remarks raise questions about the limits of government power and the long-term implications of prioritizing social harmony over individual liberties.
It’s an unfortunate trend we’ve witnessed too often in Australia. Whenever something bad happens, the people call on the government to restore their sense of safety, and the government responds by taking away more of their freedoms.
And yet, intimidation, vandalism, and threats of violence are already illegal in Australia. If existing laws prohibiting these crimes do not deter those intent on committing those crimes, then “impinging” on everyone else’s rights isn’t going to help.
Our governments must resist the urge to exploit crimes as a pretext for further eroding the limited freedoms Australians still have. Every Australian has the right to live free from violence, intimidation, and harm in their own country. But protecting that right cannot come at the cost of sacrificing another.
