Dan Andrews now wants to have Victoria locked down indefinitely!
Wow. No sooner had I finished my article on the “Perfect Tyranny Storm,” which included a warning about Victorian Premier Dan Andrews talking about making our tyrannical state of lockdown an indefinite affair, then a news item appears saying just that. The piece I had just written is found here: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2020/08/18/the-perfect-tyranny-storm
And the news item I just saw has this headline: “Vic Premier moves to extend state of emergency capabilities indefinitely”. The piece begins: “Premier Daniel Andrews is working with the state’s solicitor-general to introduce new legislation and amendments to allow authorities to extend the state of emergency for as long as necessary.” https://www.news.com.au/national/vic-premier-moves-to-extend-state-of-emergency-capabilities-indefinitely/video/33c6bc50e2176e504d3e738c9309b696
Wow again. ‘I know! Let’s just have a Police State that never ends!’ Thanks Dan – we really needed that. As if things were not hellish enough here in the dystopian monstrosity known as Victoria. Now we can try to live like this forever. What sort of fools does this megalomaniac think we are?
One thing is perfectly clear with folks like Andrews: dictators always love grabbing more and more power for themselves, but they always hate having to relinquish it. That is exactly what history teaches us as well. Way back in early May my very good friend, concerned Christian, and top-notch law professor Augusto Zimmermann penned an exceedingly important piece on this very thing.
Entitled “State Power, Control and COVID-19,” he warned about where we were heading with these draconian lockdown measures that seem to have no medical or scientific basis. Indeed, we are simply witnessing the politicisation of medicine here. He began his piece this way:
Apparently this coronavirus is so deadly that the fatality rate of those infected is less than 0.1 per cent. The overwhelming majority who contract it do not have any significant risk of dying, says Dr Scott W. Atlas, a former chief of neurology at Stanford Medical Center, who points out that the very old and those with underlying health conditions are more likely to succumb. However, based on data coming from New York City (the US hotbed of the pandemic), he informs us that only 1.7 per cent of those in their 70s who contracted the virus and acquired symptoms bad enough to seek medical care had to be hospitalised. For those under 18, hospitalisation from the virus was only 0.01. For those aged 18 to 44 it stood at 0.1 per cent. Of course, every life matters. But sometimes I ask myself how can any rational person not see that the Wuhan virus has been ingeniously used to scare, brainwash and control entire populations, even to the point of what amounts to virtual house arrest.
He went on to say this:
We are already living with all key hallmarks of a police state. According to Dennis Prager, the primary elements of a police state are: (1) draconian laws depriving citizens of elementary rights; (2) a mass media supportive of the state’s messaging and deprivation of fundamental rights; (3) excessive use of power by the police; (4) people being encouraged by the State to inform on their fellow citizens. We are currently experiencing every single one of these elements. Furthermore, many Australians apparently believe that no government action can ever be used for utterly oppressive purposes. Many even support a tracing app which their leader has painted as a service to the nation, saying it will be made compulsory if not enough people voluntarily download the application to help coronavirus case tracing. This is truly frightening, echoing as it does with reminders of Soviet and Nazi subjugation of rights and institutions, again for the alleged betterment and security of the State.
Talking about the Nazis, in the 1930s many Germans were deeply anxious for more security and government protection in the face of perceived social threats. They did not mind if the government also curtailed their freedoms. After all, they trusted the government and considered any such measures as important for their protection. When the first emergency Act was passed by the German Parliament, in March 1933, the power to legislate was handed over to a National Cabinet. This was done via Section 48 of the Constitution, which endowed the Executive with authority to rule by decree in times of national emergency. What followed were executive decrees that gradually suspended individual rights and freedoms. These measures expanded state control over the individual, as well as labour, businesses, and the economy as a whole. Constitutional rights were suspended “until further notice”. Germany’s emergency powers were supposed to be only temporary, yet they were re-enacted by the German government in 1937, 1939 and 1943, a sign and symptom of the regime’s schizophrenic combination of legality with a visceral contempt for fundamental rights and freedoms. Of course, “until further notice” did not occur until May 8, 1945, when these executive decrees were finally cancelled by the military government of the Allies.
Curiously, German lawyers argued that those measures were perfectly valid from a narrow legal perspective. Because they had been apparently authorised by the law, they simply assumed that the rule of law had therefore been preserved, and the executive was authorised to issue such decrees under those emergency powers. In other words, whatever the executive decided to do in the use of emergency powers was immediately assumed to be legally valid. Curiously, all the statutes enacted prior to the Emergency Act remained unchanged. The application of these laws, however, became at odds with the overarching intention of the drafter. As noted by Carl Schmitt (1888–1985), who was the nation’s leading legal academic, the suspension of constitutional rights was perfectly valid and justifiable in order to “protect” the community. Between 1933 and 1936, Schmitt authored numerous articles and books providing full justification for these emergency powers, as a ‘necessary’ measure and concentration of powers for the benefit of the community. As Schmitt himself pointed out:
“Once this state of emergency has been declared … the decision exempts that authority from every normative restraint and renders it absolute in the true sense of the word. In a state of emergency, the constituted authority suspends the law on the basis of the right to protect society’s own existence.”
There was something rather appealing to many about Hitler. Many believed that he had been sent by God to save the country from communism. Some also believed that he was serving God in all matters political and that he really cared for the people. In his speeches the German leader often referred to a ‘path assigned to him by God’. On one occasion, he boldly proclaimed: “Just like Christ, I have a duty to my own people”. On another occasion he recited the Lord’s Prayer after explaining how God had assigned him with the task of conducting the affairs of the German people. With the advantage of hindsight, it is quite obvious that his association with religion was entirely cynical. Pretending to be a religious person in a majority-Christian nation served his ultimate purpose of obtaining further popular support for his dictatorial regime.
Why am I referring to this? Am I saying that our Prime Minister in Australia is an aspiring dictator? Certainly not! Surely no responsible person, least of all me, would suggest such a thing. But due caution is always important nonetheless. As my good friend Bill Muehlenberg correctly points out,
“Those who seem to think that the state is always benign clearly have no understanding of history. We know how often dictators and tyrants came to power by dealing with – or promising to deal with – various emergencies and crises. It could be a breakdown in law and order, real or perceived external threats, or economic crises, but the masses tended to support these leaders in their rise to power in the face of such threats.”
The same concern was once expressed by Friedrich Hayek. An Austrian-British economist and philosopher who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1974, in volume 3 of his seminal ‘Law, Legislation and Liberty’ (1981), Hayek reminds us that “temporary” measures and policies seem to have a way of becoming permanent after the emergency is over. https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2020/05/state-power-control-and-corvid-19/
Please have a read of the whole piece. As Augusto just told me moments ago: “My worst fears are starting to be fulfilled. As it happened in 1930s Germany so it is happening now in Australia.” Exactly right. This is absolutely shocking, and every single Victorian – and Australian – should be up in arms about this.
If you are wondering what we can do about this, we have this info from Political Posting Mumma:
From today’s paper: “Premier Daniel Andrews is working with the States solicitor-general to introduce new legislation and amendments to allow authorities to extend the State of emergency for as long as is necessary.”
This means the continued suspension of parliament, complete power with no accountability and no specified sunset clause. This is unprecedented. He is working with the Attorney General Jill Hennessy to remove the final safeguards. EVERYONE needs to follow the instructions below, re-write it in their own words and email the AG, we cannot let our state be destroyed without a fight. The pace of government overreach since March-April is unrelenting. Please pray, send and forward to all your contacts. Send email to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Attention: The Hon Jill Hennessy MP – Attorney General- Dear Ms Hennessy, I understand that Law Reform has been requested by the Victorian Premier, Mr Daniel Andrews, to extend the six month period of the State of Emergency declared on 13 March 2020 to beyond 13 September 2020. I oppose and do not support any reform to this law.
Yes by all means, that is a good start. Every Victorian should contact their local members as well and complain to high heaven about this assault on our fundamental freedoms and liberties. Let me finish with a quote from Sophie Scholl. She was executed by Hitler at just 21 years of age, for daring to resist Nazi tyranny:
The real damage is done by those millions who want to ‘survive.’ The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves – or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, mate small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.