In a post last year, I outlined why left-wing promises as to the scope of their revolutionary agenda cannot be trusted.
Something similar to this can also be said of our civil authorities, in the creation and development of their Health Dictatorship–a term used last year by Tony Abbott as regarded Victorian action on coronavirus, but one that can now be applied in respect of the entire country.
For even Western Australia, the state that was arguably yet to impose draconian restrictions on its population, has followed suit. This was seen in the recent 5-day ‘lockdown’; but more notably for the purposes of this post, the changes that came into effect from Tuesday, 2 February 2021.
As of this date, adding to those that were required to do so from December 2020, every single public place attended by people has had to maintain a ‘contact register’. Meaning, that under the guise of responding to the coronavirus pandemic, the state government is now surveilling people virtually everywhere they go.
This should give cause to pause and reflect when considering the terms on which mass surveillance, justified by the coronavirus pandemic, was initially sold. These were first presented in May 2020, when the federal government’s ‘Covidsafe’ app was introduced.
At the time, those concerned over the government exploiting coronavirus to expand their social control were *falsely* assured that surveillance of this nature would be voluntary and “not mandatory.” In order to underscore this point, the federal government drafted legislation making it a crime to refuse service or entry to anyone without the Covidsafe app.
Fast forward just 8 months later in Western Australia, and almost the opposite of this has become true. As mentioned above and from 2 February, a contact register must be completed by anyone that visits public places. Individuals who fail to comply with this requirement are subject to a $50,000 fine and/or imprisonment.
The initial Covidsafe app from May 2020 and the universal mandatory contact registers from February 2021, it is true, were implemented by different governments: the first by the federal government, the second by the state government.
Through this unholy concoction of federal and state authority, nevertheless, our rulers are collectively threatening to punish us for breaking their rules, despite the rules themselves constantly changing. A sign, it is worth noting, of an abusive relationship.
From what can be observed historically in governmental responses to a crisis, moreover, it is fair to assume this mass surveillance will never go away.
The mono-party state
Besides exposing the untrustworthy makeup of current politicians, such as Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Premier Mark McGowan, the changes effective from 2 February reveal systemic failures in this late-stage liberal democracy.
On the issues which matter and particularly in the construction of its Health Dictatorship, the system essentially operates as a mono-party state. Both major parties of state and federal parliament, Big Tech, the mainstream media, the judiciary, leading financial and business interests–are all in concurrence and act as one. Or, if there are some private objectors among these and other key institutions, they stay silent, allowing the whims of the mono-party state to proceed unopposed.
This being the case, there are (at least for now) no legitimate means of remedying the destructive course of this mono-party state, whether in relation to the Health Dictatorship, Drag Queen story hour, or demographic change. Opponents of these developments are as powerless as Alexei Navalny, in his efforts to challenge the rule of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
One thought on “False assurances and the mono-party state”