Politically the world seems to be moving very much to the right, and with it there is an attack on thinking, especially critical thinking where an issue is questioned, analysed, interpreted and evaluated to make a judgement about the issue.
Critical thinking is a dangerous activity, and should be banned. It has been a problem for a long time. In ancient Greece, Socrates was forced to drink a beaker of hemlock to silence him, to stop him from teaching young people of Athens to think since the thinking led to questioning of how the city elders were behaving. Socrates knew how little he knew as opposed to the power elite of Athens who knew everything. They saw that Socrates encouraging young people to think was a threat to their authority, so Socrates had to go.
Don’t question the superiority of the race which dominated the world for over 5 centuries, the White European colonisers. The intolerance that we see expressed in so many ways as political and racist bigotry also has its origins in colonialism. In his introduction to Empire: How Britain made the modern world, Niall Ferguson quotes an excerpt from the 2001 Durban Declaration of the World Conference against Racism:
… Colonialism has led to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and… Africans and people of African descent and indigenous peoples were victims of colonialism and continue to be victims of its consequences.
The danger of critical thinking is that it allows the examination of the origins of bigotry, of discrimination, of seeing ‘difference’ in its many forms, in colour, in creed, in self identification, in politics, and in responses to the humanitarian crisis refugees and statelessness presents.
Thinking, especially critical thinking threatens authoritarian leaders and so they target protesters and universities which encourage critical thinking to quell dissent.
We have seen, since the beginning of the conflict in Gaza, protests about the brutality of the Israeli response to the vicious, murderous terrorist attack on a music festival on October 7 last year, an attack which saw 1200 people killed and 250 taken as hostages, probably as bargaining chips to negotiate a more sustainable life for the 2.3 million people crammed into the Gaza strip, dependent on Israel for the provision of basic life essentials such as food, water sewerage, power. Not one of the protesters supported Hamas and their terrorist act, but were appealing that the wholesale destruction of Gaza be stopped. But the protests were seen as supporting Hamas, supporting terrorism, antisemitic, anti Israel’s right to defend itself. The universities were criticised for allowing the protests on university campuses.
And under no circumstances mention that the Israeli military used the ‘Hannibal Directive’ against the terrorists, resulting the IDF killing many of its own citizens and soldiers as they drove the Hamas attackers back to Gaza.
The protesters separate the October attack from the destruction of Gaza and the apparent genocide of the Palestinians living in Gaza. To be pro Palestinian is not to be anti-Israel, it is not antisemitic. Critical thinking makes that distinction, but it is politically uncomfortable for the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu and in the various governments which support him, including Australia. October 7, it is better to believe, came out of the blue, it has nothing to do with the treatment of the Palestinians of Gaza and their treatment over the years since the Nakba of 1948.
There are many other examples on autocratic leaders quelling dissent, attacking universities for questioning various policies and discriminatory practice. The New York Times in February reported that universities in India were anti-India according to the Prime Minister who promotes a Nationalistic form of Hindu, as he discriminates against the Sikh and Muslim communities in India.
In Pakistan, peaceful student protests objected to the imprisonment of former PM Imran Khan and the ban on the press even so much as mentioning him, have threatened nation wide protests if Khan is not freed by August 30. Khan is in prison on charges of an illegal marriage and regarding state secrets which saw him imprisoned in February on what are considered trumped up charges. The response to the threat of protests has been for the government to introduce bills restricting the right to protest.
Similarly in Bangladesh, student protests questioning a government decision to allocate certain government jobs to a favoured elite were met with a violent crackdown but continued protest and support for the students from the military saw the autocratic Prime Minister, Sheik Hasina flee the country, at this stage a victory for the students and a victory for the right to protest and to question government decisions.
In each case. in each country the news is censored, the true situation is withheld from the citizens. I know a Russian family who arrived here about four years ago, they cannot understand the ‘lies’ told in Australian news broadcasts, and how they differ from the Russian news they get through the internet regarding the Ukraine conflict.
Difference is not to be tolerated. This is most apparent in issues such as immigration where despite there being around 117.3 million forcibly displaced people in the world at the end of 2023, according to the UNHCR report, not including those wishing to flee Gaza as that enclave continues to be razed to the ground. It seems no country wants them.
It is far easier to dismiss the very idea that there can be four times the population of this country seeking somewhere to live since for any number of reasons they cannot live in their homelands.
Turning to the dumbing down of political rhetoric here in Australia, we had the negative campaign against the Voice referendum, ‘If you don’t know, vote no’, the rejection by the opposition to explore the violence of colonialism by promoting ‘Truth Telling’. To listen to indigenous people on land use, to criminalise young offenders by making the age of criminal accountability 10 years, before children are mature enough to make such distinctions, to treat young people charged with ‘adult crimes’ as adults, to mete out ‘adult time’ on conviction.
On immigration, the simplistic ‘Turn Back The Boats’ slogan and ensuring that no asylum seeker arriving as ‘boat people’ are denied entry to Australia, but are sent to off shore detention facilities, denied the respect enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, effectively criminalised and imprisoned without trial. To effectively claim any Palestinian seeking to come here from the hell hole of Gaza is a Hamas supporter, hence a terrorist and denied a visa despite passing through at least three security checks.
Don’t think too deeply on the ‘crime waves’ committed by young people. Don’t think too deeply about what causes children to be ‘criminal’, don’t look too deeply at the socio-economic situation of their families, or that they may even have been state wards, taken away from troubled households but offering little or no support to those house holds.
Don’t think for a moment that the lives of two teenagers in custody in Western Australia could have been saved though a better system than one which criminalises poverty and dysfunctional family life. Solve the problems by being ‘tough on crime’. Lock them up and throw away the key!
Don’t think that people seeking refugee status are really desperate, they could be criminals, murderers, rapists, terrorists. Don’t think for a moment that 117.3 million people are forced to flee from their homelands because of wars, religious conflict, famine, discrimination or any other life threatening situation. If they cannot afford a plane ticket and visa to arrive here legally, as tourists and overstay their tourist visa, they are not welcome.
I recently posed a question during a discussion, to consider where the animosity between religions comes from, both in terms of religious texts and holy books, the practice of these faiths including the divisions within those faiths (sects or denominations), the story of colonialism including the cultural and economic influences as a result of colonialism. Also to consider the situations for those nations after the colonial powers left.
One response was that I align with terrorists.
Don’t think too deeply, don’t engage in critical thinking.
Ever.
You may be considered to be aligned with criminals or terrorists.
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
[/textblock]
