John Roughan on Goff’s censorship

Auckland mayor and enforcer of the Hecklers’ Veto, Phil ‘gutless’ Goff

John Roughan takes exception to Phil Goff’s assault of free speech: Quote:

Like many of us this week no doubt, I’ve put the names Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux into the search engine, curious to find out why the Mayor of Auckland considers their views too dangerous to be given a public platform in our fair city.

The search turned up video clips of Southern, a young Canadian holding a microphone in the middle of a demonstration. A woman with a nose ring was berating her for insisting there are only two genders in this world. Another clip showed her invading a woman’s march against sexual harassment. She was asking the marchers whether they wanted “women’s rights or Islam?”

She opposes unchecked immigration, particularly if it’s Islamic, and she has exposed something that worried me when an Economist report mentioned in passing that Italian naval craft were going almost to the North African coast to pick up “refugees” who had only to jump out of a boat.

Southern is essentially a journalist who asks unwelcome questions, questions that lurk in the mind of probably all of thinking people and challenge the dominant sympathies of the mass media today.

Molyneux is an intellectually heavier proposition. He subscribes to a theory that IQ differs between ethnic groups and claims it is based on US Army records of IQ tests of its ranks over the years. He is very glib and very serious. He doesn’t foam at the mouth. He says he doesn’t want to believe the results of his research but has no choice. It leads him to conclusions you are not allowed to say these days. End quote.

That is why the left wing must silence them. Because they actually do speak truth to power. They aren’t afraid of being howled down on Twitter by fascists masquerading as anti-fascists trying to bully them into silence. Quote:

But suppression is never the right answer. My answer to Molyneux would be, I don’t care, because people are not ethnic groups they are individuals and I want to live in a state that does what it can to try to ensure nobody’s education or life opportunities suffer from racial stereotyping.

He would have an answer to that for those who were still listening, and many would be. His views are socially dangerous but the answer is not to block them from public venues. This is New Zealand.

We have freedom of speech, which means our law allows you to say what you think as long as you are not inciting violence. You are allowed to be offensive and even extremely provocative. In 2010 our Supreme Court quashed the conviction of one Valerie Morse for burning the New Zealand flag across the road from the Wellington Cenotaph where people were assembled for the dawn service on Anzac Day. That is how close you can come to inviting violence here.

If Southern and Molyneux’s visit sparked any violence it would have come from demonstrations against them, including, ironically, by one Valerie Morse who calls herself Auckland Peace Action. She had threatened to confront their supporters on the streets and blockade their venues.

They had booked the Bruce Mason Centre in Takapuna, the nearest thing to a Town Hall we have on the North Shore. It was built back in the days we had our own city council and the late George Gair was mayor. Now, like everything else we had, it’s owned by a distant body that often sounds foreign to us.

Mayor Phil Goff has decreed, “Auckland Council venues shouldn’t be used to stir up ethnic or religious tensions. Views that divide rather than unite are repugnant and I have made my views on this very clear. Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux will not be speaking at any council venues.”

Goodness. The Bruce Mason has accommodated a number of events down the years that not everyone on the Shore would have welcomed, including, surprisingly often, the Labour Party’s annual conference. End quote.

At that conference there was violence outside, when unionist Len Richards assaulted someone with his megaphone. Given that altercation, will Phil Goff ban the Labour party from holding conferences in Auckland Council venues? Quote:

Ethnic and religious tensions are only some of the subjects that divide public opinion. Are Auckland Council venues to be also closed to the anti-vaccination people, anti-flouridationists, advocates of euthanasia? They pose a more immediate risk to our public health and human life in my view, but I wouldn’t want them banned.

A town hall is supposed to be every community’s open forum. When televised election debates are styled “town hall meetings” it means they are at least pretending to be free and open to unscripted views of all sorts. In the last days of our 2014 election campaign the venerable Auckland Town Hall was the venue for Kim Dotcom’s ill-fated final rally, featuring an American left-wing journalist and leakers Edward Snowden and Julian Assange.

That was about as repugnant to many Auckland ratepayers as any event I can recall. Yet I heard nobody say they should not have been allowed to use the Town Hall and nobody suggested that by making it available, the Auckland Council endorsed what Dotcom and his guests were saying. This country is not afraid of free speech. End quote.

But Phil Goff is, just as he is afraid of the truth. The bar Goff has set means that he could stop almost any discourse occurring. Of course, now that he has set the bar, other angry Aucklanders can stop the use of Council facilities for things like the Pride festival, or any Islamic event for that matter.

Phil Goff should admit his mistake and let the event go ahead. He won’t because he is digging in, even accusing me, privately to other people, of being behind events that have unfolded. He really needs to stop and look in he mirror to identify who is responsible for the pickle he finds himself in.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story. When he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet. Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet and, as a result, he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist who takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him, you can’t ignore him.

Listen to this post:
29%