Skip to Content

Features Australia

Dystopic pregnancy

Gender fluidity theory is just another sign of the ideological tyranny of the elites

28 October 2017

9:00 AM

28 October 2017

9:00 AM

The mathematical, reading and science skills of Australian school students are in serious decline with the average student now close to Singapore’s most disadvantaged. Worse, the most significant fall is among our best. Having just wasted an extra $26 billion, Minister Birmingham’s reaction was the standard incantation: ‘Gonski’.

What has all this to do with Same Sex Marriage? Everything. The education disaster flows from federal politicians doing, with impunity, what first Prime Minister Edmund Barton correctly said the Constitution prohibits — intruding into matters clearly reserved to the states. The result is anarchy, with politicians endlessly playing the blame game, thus allowing Marxists to move in and replace true education with propaganda, all to advance their agenda to turn Australia into a socialist utopia, the Venezuela of the South Seas.

Their current tactic is to undermine the institution they despise most because they cannot control it, the family. They’re accelerating this through the fantasy that the fundamental biological difference between man and woman can be neutralised by renaming ‘sex’ as ‘gender’, to persuade children and the elites that sex is no longer determined at birth but is a matter of choice. For this, they have conjured up a non-existent LGBTI etc. ‘community’ to justify turning the new-found fashionable obsession of a minuscule minority for SSM into a major political campaign.

Don’t think for a minute, as the naïve do, that success in this will appease the Marxists. It will only encourage them to destroy traditional marriage, limit our several freedoms and move onto other institutions and values deemed inimical to socialism. The schools will become the Marxist equivalent of madrassas, standards will fall even more and they’ll campaign against any testing which reveals this. The next generation of Australians will pay the price.

SSM and gender fluidity are only the latest deranged ideologies to which our elites flock like bees to a honey pot, just as they do with the myth that ‘the’ science about global warming is settled and that abandoning national borders with world government is invariably beneficial.

G.K.Chesterton is widely believed to have identified the reason: when man stops believing in God, it’s not that he believes in nothing; he will believe in anything. And with Gramsci’s long march through the institutions, belief in these deranged ideologies is now mandatory in most schools, universities and the mainstream media.


Even big business is pushing SSM. The stratospherically paid executives are no longer content with playing Lenin’s ‘useful idiots’. What we are seeing is big business seduced into becoming the crony corporate arm of a centralised leviathan state as prescribed by Mussolini and Gentile. This is the fascist model of socialism which was adopted by the National Socialists and which saved the Chinese communists from the fate of the Soviets.

Fascism also requires that the vote be uninformed by denying the No case fair reporting and subjecting its proponents to threatened and actual violence by street thugs, especially in the universities. By its suspicious failure to table legislation to protect our freedoms— as a government led by John Howard or Tony Abbott would have — the Turnbull government has abetted an uninformed vote.

If incipient fascism is not enough to bloat the Yes vote, the lack of integrity in our electoral system will. On the fiction that voting had to be made easier, voting in small subdivisions where voters are more likely to be known was abolished without any balancing requirement for identification. Nor was enrolment made as secure as, say, opening a bank account is, nor is the name of a person voting immediately ruled off everywhere by using what is already old technology.

Access to the rolls was forbidden on the ground of privacy, made laughable by politicians exempting the trustworthy, themselves. Scrutineers armed with the roll can no longer knock on any door asking about the number of people allegedly living there, nor check on fake addresses. Because the avalanche of enrolments between the calling of an election and the closing of the rolls cannot be properly checked, John Howard legislated to close the rolls on the day the election was called. But when Julia Gillard called one for 21 August 2010, the High Court in the GetUp! case bent over backwards to hear two plaintiffs who had broken the law by not bothering to enrol or notify a change of address, inexplicably declaring the legislation unconstitutional. It took another four months for the Court to reveal, just before Christmas, how narrow their 4:3 decision was and for the majority to write down their wholly unpersuasive reasons.

In the meantime, GetUp! boasted that with 100,000 extra voters they had saved the Gillard government’s bacon. They had indeed; this was a hung parliament. Not surprising then that around 100,000 extra people have also come onto the rolls for the SSM survey, without any proper verification. And if a roll lacking integrity wasn’t enough, there’s an unbelievable absence of safeguards in the counting with not even the most minimal requirement that the person voting make a declaration as to his or her identity.

The voting form, which hasn’t even been initialled by an official, is easily copied. So, when the barcode is read, will it be determined in the presence of independent scrutineers whether this is the original or a copy?

Changing the institution of marriage was always far too important to be left to the politicians, but this survey lacks any integrity and is against the clear intention of the Constitution. It can enjoy no moral or legal authority.

The only proper course now will be to delay any further action on something for which there is hardly any real demand and certainly no urgency as demonstrated by the feverish attempts by proponents to stop it. The issue can only be determined properly at the next election through a constitutional referendum under an electoral system reformed to be better than that worthy of a banana republic.

Those who will opt not to go will be those who don’t believe they will sufficiently benefit from an education to eventually pay back the loans: people who aren’t actually interested in learning.

The greatest threat to quality higher education in this country is the students themselves. Student unions have organised to fight the changes; in May Julie Bishop was assaulted and Q and A was hijacked, and last month when the Prime Minister visited the aforementioned University of Adelaide, the protests were so vast that a sizeable mounted police escort was brought in. If the students en masse were willing to spend more time studying and less time making a nuisance of themselves, the measures being undertaken by the Government wouldn’t be necessary.

Is it all an elitist ploy, as the Labor claims? It absolutely is, and we should be thrilled about it. If you can’t have elitism in higher education, where can you have it?

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments

Comments

The Spectator Comment Policy

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

Close