This is a real concern, because I have seen cases where groups (government or not) try to distort definitions such as “antisemitism” to include valid critiques of the Zionist Regime, and then try to lump that in among actually progressive protections in order to feign that the censorship is progressive. It’s related to rainbow capitalism, the abuse of progressive movements to facilitate oppression. I haven’t kept up with the Victorian legislation in question, I don’t know if this is the case, but the linked articles suggest it’s on the table.
That said, it goes without saying, the parts protecting the rainbow community from bigotry is obviously a benefit to society.
This is a real concern, because I have seen cases where groups (government or not) try to distort definitions such as “antisemitism” to include valid critiques of the Zionist Regime, and then try to lump that in among actually progressive protections in order to feign that the censorship is progressive. It’s related to rainbow capitalism, the abuse of progressive movements to facilitate oppression. I haven’t kept up with the Victorian legislation in question, I don’t know if this is the case, but the linked articles suggest it’s on the table.
That said, it goes without saying, the parts protecting the rainbow community from bigotry is obviously a benefit to society.