The Soviet-Style Censorship of NZ Doctors
The censoring of doctors – even the ‘expert’ public health ones.
The censoring of doctors – even the ‘expert’ public health ones.
Even when backed by science. The New Zealand Parliament under Ardern and now Luxon has shown itself unable to tolerate questions. The main loser has been the New Zealand public.
Policies that are subjective, undefined and leave room for interpretation or constant expansion deserve greater scrutiny as these are the ones that become slippery slopes.
Family First’s submission on the Law Commission’s consultation around ‘hate crime’.
The measure I’m most concerned about is clause 18, which will amend the Equality Act to force employers to “take all reasonable steps” to insulate their staff from “harassment” by “third parties”.
USAID is better in the waste bin and demolition derbies are exciting, but nuance can get lost in the frenzy and targets missed as a result.
If governments can compel tech companies to break encryption, digital privacy risks becoming a privilege reserved for the ideologically compliant – not an inalienable right.
Science requires us to challenge received ‘truth’ and seek out better evidence. But that questioning challenges our baked-in respect for authority.
All too often important effects are in the hands of people who have no appreciation for the potential importance of what they control.
Germany’s prosecutions of meme-posters provide a chilling example of what happens when governments dictate what counts as ‘hate.’
The whole rotten structure needs to be dismantled. We deserve the right to free expression, whether or not it causes offence.
Making information disorder a syndrome affecting the individual allows the state through the medical and insurance industries to step in and force the individual to conform to societal norms.
I refuse to wear that digital face mask, Mr Musk. Impose your social distancing to flatten that AI curve, I’ll simply publish and consume content elsewhere. We must resist the robots.