Price of pragmatism is human rights and freedom

[Violet_Crumble]

The failure to fight assaults on our rights further imperils them, writes Julian Burnside.

Gerard Henderson recently argued on this page ("The PM's no match for Adolf or Joe", 15/3) that Australia has entered a phase in which pragmatism is a sufficient justification for conduct. That is so. Alarmingly, given his prominence as a public commentator, Henderson argues in support of this approach.

Henderson puts the argument in favour of pragmatism. He mentions briefly, but distorts and seeks to discredit, the counter-arguments. This does not advance the public discussion of important issues.

Henderson correctly observes that I recently addressed the NSW Council for Civil Liberties and spoke of the development of events in Germany in the 1930s. He then observes that it is understandable why some citizens become frustrated if a political leader with whose policies they disagree gets elected or re-elected and finally arrives at the conclusion that pragmatism makes sense in contemporary Australia, where comparisons with Hitler and/or Stalin are meaningless.

This does not address the core of the argument I was making. Civil liberties in Australia today are being significantly eroded. The erosion has been justified on pragmatic grounds: executive detention to deter asylum seekers; increased wire-tapping to combat crime; incommunicado detention and interrogation of people not suspected of any offence, but thought to have information about others. The erosion is accepted by the majority of citizens for a variety of reasons.

One is that these things get much less coverage in the media than their significance demands and, when they are covered in the media, they are tacitly approved (or only faintly disapproved) by most commentators. Those more vocal in their criticism of these things (such as me) find it difficult to have their dissenting views published; and when they are published they are likely to be distorted and disparaged.

This brings me to the point I actually made. I discussed the gradual erosion of the rights of unpopular minorities in Germany in the 1930s not to suggest that Howard is like Hitler, but to pose the question: when should German citizens have spoken up in defence of those minorities? When should they have said: lawful or not, democratic or not, this should not be happening?

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Opinion/Price-of-pragmatism-is-human-rights-and-freedom/2005/03/23/1111525218518.html