Why are the left so frightened of a plebiscite?
And when I say frightened I don’t mean a little nervous, they seem utterly terrified at the very prospect.
Penny Wong ALP Frontbencher stated:
“I know that a plebiscite designed to deny me and many other Australians a marriage certificate will instead license hate speech to those who need little encouragement.”
“Mr Turnbull – and many commentators on this subject – don’t understand that for gay and lesbian Australians, hate speech is not abstract,” Wong said.
She said she faced abuse in her Twitter feed that signalled “words that hurt” would be used in the debate against LGBTI Australians less resilient than herself.
Former High Court justice Michael Kirby:
“A plebiscite on same-sex marriage risks unleashing hate and division in the community and would create a dangerous political precedent.”
Taxpayer funded “comedian” Hannah Gadsby:
“The very idea of an ongoing debate around marriage equality makes my stomach turn… I am very concerned that the plebiscite debate is going to be another open season for hate. I fear for those, particularly in regional Australia, who are isolated from positive voices… Speech is not free when it comes at such a cost. This plebiscite is F—ED.”
Dr Grainne Healy, Irish Homosexual issues activist:
“At best will lead to an experience of divisive, hurtful campaigning, with no guarantee of progressing marriage equality.. Legislation to introduce marriage equality is what is needed in Australia and those who support marriage equality rights must move to see that legislation introduced as quickly as possible and the proposed divisive plebiscite should not take place,”
Greens leader Richard Di Natale:
‘I’m worried about the plebiscite, I worry about what that will do in terms on unleashing some hateful views and giving legitimacy to them.. a plebiscite has the potential to harm young people and that we will most likely see young people take their lives if this plebiscite goes ahead and the hate that will come with that is unleashed.”
Tory Shepherd In The Advertiser:
“Clearly, a same-sex marriage plebiscite will be ugly and ungainly.”
Bill Shorten ALP leader:
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has linked the planned plebiscite on same-sex marriage to the Orlando massacre and the murder of British MP Jo Cox, suggesting the campaign could “give haters the chance to come out from under the rock”.
As my fellow XYZ contributor David Hiscox has pointed out in his own excellent article, What happened to 70 percent, Mr Shorten? it really is extraordinary.
Considering that the past few years have been a parade of various Leftist and Gay activists telling us that the vast majority of people support their position, and that Gay Marriage is the most pressing and important political issue of our time, it seems a little strange that with victory almost within their grasp, the warriors of equality would turn their backs on an opportunity for such an important piece of social “progress” because it might cause a few hurt feelings.
The truth is that they probably don’t have much reason to be scared; despite the dodgy polling data, my estimate is they would probably win a plebiscite.
Those of us who have gained some insight into the left understand their fear, however. Open votes where plebs get to decide on the issues that affect society as a whole are simply not how they like to do things.
They’re terrified because they know they never won the argument on this issue and are perhaps understandably wary of opening themselves up to one. Leftists tend not to win any of their campaigns or conquests over the rest of us through reasoned debate, or even by building consensus. They win by making the views of anyone who disagrees with them socially unacceptable.
It’s a simple method and has worked gloriously for them.
All they need to do is make sure that the academics promoted to positions of influence within our higher education system all agree with them on all the points that matter. They make certain of this by controlling future academics from their first days as undergraduates right up the postgraduate chain, controlling grants, employment and all the other lucre from the taxpayer trough that serves as the lifeblood of those who consider themselves our betters.
Once they have the academics, they control the education of the educators, thus moving the indoctrination back as far as possible into early childhood. They change everything from sex education to colouring books to suit the intricacies of their ideological agenda. They then churn out class after class of cookie-cutter graduates with cookie-cutter worldviews to fill the ranks not just of teachers, but journalists, social workers, political staffers, public servants and even the higher levels of our police and military.
When you have a system like this, why would you ever want a vote? When regardless of electoral results, your agenda moves further forward every year, when every new generation of children to pass through your machine goes politically further to the left than the one before?
Why take any risk of disturbing the narrative of endless Leftist victory, of endless “progress”?
One confirmation of the reasoning for their fear came from Bill Shorten:
“I’m worried Malcolm Turnbull will just stuff it up,” Mr Shorten said. “He stuffed up the republic referendum….”
In poker playing parlance, the reference to the Republic referendum is a large, flaming rotating red light of a tell.
The Left, including Malcolm Turnbull, have never quite recovered from the last time they put their dominance of the culture to a public vote.
In the 1999 Republic referendum every single newspaper in Australia recommended a Yes vote. Academia, the media, the establishment classes were united as one, it seemed impossible that the Left could lose.
Yet they did.
Shorten, with this dog whistle, is trying to remind Malcolm that they are on the same side, both rich boys from rich families, both educated expensively and well indoctrinated into the “correct” mindset. The opposition leader is trying to remind the Prime Minister that ultimately they, as well as almost the entire establishment and the majority of both houses of parliament, share a particular position on this issue.
While their chances of failure might be slight, the fate of so much of the British political class post Brexit shows just what can happen when the sheep are allowed any chance to dramatically turn on the shepherd.
Who on earth wants to risk that when the country is clearly “progressing” so well?
