3 ms·

Don't you actually need to be inciting something to be accused of incitement? It seems like being accused of doing ...

lucozade 5y ago
She's being accused of inciting others to pursue conduct that would involve the commission of an offence. That's against the law in Victoria.
graderjs 5y ago
Perhaps another success for DC's precrime division? Or perhaps we live in an age where ideas are dangerous--ideas that cut into massive corporations' profits, or suggest curtailment or questioning of government power and control--and where the dissidents that merely speak such ideas, even in the so-called Western liberal democracies are worthy recipients of "masks of shame" like "anti-vaxx" or "conspiracy theorist", plus a good measure of a bit of the ol' ultraharassment from the legal system. I do feel sorry for the poor, "Julian Assange"-esque personality type that thinks that drawing attention to their martyr-like "noble sacrifices" is something either effective for their "cause" or in their self interest. It's clearly neither, and sometimes I wish dissenting voices were a bit smarter. Then again, engagement not activism is noble pragmatic rhetoric, but in an age where maybe dissenting ideas can't even get a word in edge-wise what's an engagement-minded divergent thinker to do? Who brought this plague of zero-nuance and idea-censorship upon us, that has so effectively choked-out a vibrant and diverse public discourse? And in democracies no less?! edit: I guess I didn't read the audience of this article here that well, because I expected that these well-written and impassioned pleas for a bit of open-ness in the discourse, as well as criticism and questioning of the homogeneity would be well received here. I feel pretty sad they weren't because if people here don't think critically enough, or have courage enough, to think outside the blinders that are so obviously on our society at this time, then who will? You know: the smart, savvy, mostly financially independent tech workers...if they can't afford a bit of dissent, or critical inquiry, then who can, seriously?

She's being accused of inciting others to pursue conduct that would involve the commission of an offence. That's against the law in Victoria.

graderjs 5y ago

Perhaps another success for DC's precrime division? Or perhaps we live in an age where ideas are dangerous--ideas that cut into massive corporations' profits, or suggest curtailment or questioning of government power and control--and where the dissidents that merely speak such ideas, even in the so-called Western liberal democracies are worthy recipients of "masks of shame" like "anti-vaxx" or "conspiracy theorist", plus a good measure of a bit of the ol' ultraharassment from the legal system. I do feel sorry for the poor, "Julian Assange"-esque personality type that thinks that drawing attention to their martyr-like "noble sacrifices" is something either effective for their "cause" or in their self interest. It's clearly neither, and sometimes I wish dissenting voices were a bit smarter. Then again, engagement not activism is noble pragmatic rhetoric, but in an age where maybe dissenting ideas can't even get a word in edge-wise what's an engagement-minded divergent thinker to do? Who brought this plague of zero-nuance and idea-censorship upon us, that has so effectively choked-out a vibrant and diverse public discourse? And in democracies no less?! edit: I guess I didn't read the audience of this article here that well, because I expected that these well-written and impassioned pleas for a bit of open-ness in the discourse, as well as criticism and questioning of the homogeneity would be well received here. I feel pretty sad they weren't because if people here don't think critically enough, or have courage enough, to think outside the blinders that are so obviously on our society at this time, then who will? You know: the smart, savvy, mostly financially independent tech workers...if they can't afford a bit of dissent, or critical inquiry, then who can, seriously?