Thought Crime

[poliphilo]

Novak Djokovic got his appeal against the cancelling of his visa quashed on the grounds that he might have anti-vaxxer views and therefore represent a threat to the minds and bodily health of all right-thinking Australians. That's my interpretation of the judge's ruling- and if you think I'm off target read it yourself and see what you think. So, he isn't infectious, he isn't in breach of the law- and the only thing he's guilty of is supposedly holding unorthodox views. I say "supposedly" because the judge says he suspects Djokovic of holding such views, but can't be certain because Djokovic has never come right out and voiced them...

Remember "Are you or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party"- and how we're we all now thoroughly contemptuous of McCarthy and the House Committee for UnAmerican Activities? Does what has been done to Djokovic (and the many others who have been cancelled or censored and vilified for thinking against the grain on Covid related issues) differ in any important respect from what was done to the film professionals who got blacklisted by Hollywood- and in many instances chased out of the country for being a bit left-wing- Charlie Chaplin being one?

Remember 1984- and how in Orwell's dystopian society you could be punished for harbouring a thought crime?

Comments

[cmcmck]

Trouble appears to be that he had either told lies to get hold of his visa or the Serbian government had worked a fiddle for him, neither of which was wise.

[poliphilo]

Those things may be well be true, but they don't seem to be the grounds on which the appeal was quashed.