Loosening lips? Keep an eye on the ships

George Brandis’ defence of free speech is as articulate today as it was when he addressed the parliament all those years ago on section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act (“I will always defend someone’s right to be a bigot – it’s hypocrisy that annoys me more”, November 7). However, as he did then, he omits a critical factor from his argument – what happens when free speech becomes incitement to violence? Of course free speech is a cornerstone of liberal democracy, but we cannot reasonably insist on the right to say what we want in the public square without considering the consequences of urging violence against others, whether it be on the basis of race, religion, gender or sexual preference. Everything begins with words, and that includes violence. It is invidious to abandon all restraints, throw caution to the wind and let everyone say what they will. Where will social cohesion be then? Vic Alhadeff, Darlinghurst

George Brandis will always defend the right to be a bigot, as long as it does not offend him personally, as it did when his bigotry chicken came home to roost on the Senate crossbenches in the form of Pauline Hanson in a burqa nine years ago. Therein lies his hypocrisy. He thinks everyone else should be subject to random offensive bigotry without the protection of the law because offensive bigotry constitutes “free speech”. The right to feel safe from racist, sexist or other bigoted attack is surely a hallmark of a civilised society. Free speech is surely the right to express political, religious or philosophical opinions without feeling free to make bigoted personal attacks. “Freedom of political communication” does not include telling an opponent who happened to be born in another country to “pack your bags and go home”, or as Pauline Hanson said to Mehreen Faruqi in the Senate: “Piss off back to Pakistan”. June Simpson, Petersham

War not genocide

Plestia Alaqad repeats the genocide libel against Israel ad nauseam (“The Gaza reporter who captured the world’s eye”, November 7). It’s a war, not a genocide. Countries committing genocide don’t warn and evacuate civilians, allow millions of tonnes of food aid or provide polio vaccines, as Israel did. She claims that Israel falsely labels journalists as Hamas members, but recently Hamas has been publishing notices celebrating supposed journalists killed as “martyred” military members. The article mentions that Israel began a major offensive in Lebanon in 2024. That was only after 11 months of incessant bombing of Israel by Hezbollah. Alaqad says she refuses to appear on panels with supporters of Israel because she doesn’t want to have to debate whether she has the right to exist as a Palestinian. It’s a pity she wasn’t asked whether she believes Israel has the right to exist. The Hamas terrorists who rule Gaza and started the war certainly don’t. Shane Shmuel, Elsternwick (Vic)

One Nation danger signs

We’ve seen the results in the US, when billionaires bankroll unqualified and unscrupulous people into political office. Chaos, corruption, nepotism and incompetence ensue, and the rules of law, political and legal convention and ethical behaviour are discarded. If One Nation “loyalist” Sean Black warns Gina Rinehart is dictating strategy; James Ashby may be enriching himself; nepotism is rife; candidates display a lack of competence to wield power; and some insiders “don’t have a clue what democracy is”, we should all heed his warning, as he is in a better position than most to make these calls (“Secret tapes reveal turmoil for One Nation, Rinehart ties”, November 7). Add to this Pauline Hanson’s Trump-like actions in refusing to answer questions from journalists, and barring of media that she doesn’t like, and we have many danger signs that voters should not ignore. Alan Marel, North Curl Curl

Are Mar-a-Lago partygoers Gina Rinehart and Pauline Hanson ready for Trump’s celebrations of the midterm election’s outcomes? William Forbes, Medowie

Economically challenged

I can only assume/hope that Peter Hartcher was being ironic when he asked of the Liberals, “Can you recover your standing as the most credible economic manager?” So was the profligacy of the Morrison era credible economic management (“Trump’s midterms shellacking is a gift in disguise to the Liberal Party”, November 7)? And what of the Howard/Costello changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing that has pushed up house prices 400 per cent? The liquidation of public assets and programs for tax cuts, Telstra, Qantas and all the others? Labor has to its credit the reforms of the Hawke/Keating years, the saving of the economy during the global financial crisis and finally the albeit too cautious reforms of the Albanese government. The Liberals better economic managers? In what strange parallel universe is that? Nicholas Triggs, Katoomba

Peter Hartcher lets the Liberals off the hook. Sure, it’s time for them to distance themselves from toxic Trump, but there is no backbone in their economic policies. Hartcher should have nailed the usual mantra that the Liberals are the better economic managers. So, reversing tax changes, removing green energy incentives and undermining migrant workers are credible policies? When are we going to learn that negativity doesn’t equal economic management? Michael Blissenden, Castle Hill

Payman owed her dues

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s refusal to allocate an adviser-level position to independent senator Fatima Payman’s office appears petty and vindictive (“From ‘token Muslim’ to a thorn in Labor’s side”, November 8). Especially when one considers every other independent parliamentarian has been granted this staffing allocation. One expects a prime minister to rise above the fray, rather than behave like a punitive factional boss. Albanese would do better to reconsider Labor’s anachronistic prohibition on its members crossing the floor. Payman’s departure from Labor followed her vote to recognise Palestine – a position the government itself subsequently adopted. Was she not simply ahead of her party? Labor’s insistence on conformity reflects its socialist traditions but is anachronistic. A truly democratic party needs to accommodate dissent, not punish it. Solidarity should not require the surrender of individual conscience. It is a mark of totalitarian governments to compel conformity, not democracies. Salvatore Sorbello, Campsie

Another “own goal” if it is true about the bribe offered to Fatima Payman, but why has she been silent for so long (“PM offered me staff in return for my vote: Payman”, November 7)? If it is true, then why tell us about it two years later. Looks like payback, and doesn’t do her own reputation and credibility any good either. Ian Ferrier, Long Jetty

Bring on 2028 total detox

Enjoyed the letters today commenting on Donald (Letters, November 7). Yes, it’s fabulous that the US is shedding itself of the DTs, and let’s hope withdrawal is finalised with the presidential election in 2028 and total detox.
Wendy Crew, Lane Cove North

They say revenge is a dish best served cold. I can think of a better dish: lame duck a l’orange. Stephen Driscoll, Castle Hill

Welcome straight bat from Uzzie

Thank goodness Usman Khawaja has come out and rescued Steve Smith, David Warner and Cameron Bancroft from the depths of the sandpaper scandal (“‘It was all of us’: Khawaja blows whistle on use of sandpaper”, November 7). Otherwise, the reputation of those three could have been besmirched for years. Could I suggest there should be some sort of financial reward given to Usman for pouring out his conscience to the public in such a timely fashion? Bernie Bourke, Ourimbah

The publication by Usman Khawaja that the whole team knew about the sandpaper tactic is finally stating the bleeding obvious. The multitude of Australians who have played team sport have all experienced the fact that one of the joys of team sport is being in on what “today’s tactics are”. The idea that a professional team wouldn’t have shared a tactic beyond three players has always beggared belief. Well played, Uzzie. Tony Denzel, Bonny Hills

Usman Khawaja’s sandpapergate revelation that “it was all of us” brings to mind that great line attributed to the Australian vice captain during the famous Bodyline series. To paraphrase: “Which one of you bastards called this bastard a bastard?” I mean, next you’ll be telling me the bloody Poms cheat! Phil Bradshaw, Naremburn

Aristocratic touch

I am exactly 100 years younger than David Jones and have some very vivid memories of visits to the store as a child (“It’s deja vu for David Jones as hard times leave it praying for a saviour”, November 7). On one occasion, just after the end of World War II, I visited the store with my mother on a well-publicised sale day. I witnessed, with the fascination of a seven-year-old, a fist fight and tug-of-war battle between two ladies over a bolt of material. I can also attest that the store treated its customers like royalty. My mother received a parcel purchased at DJs with her name typed as “The Countess E.E. Moroney”. Puzzled, she finally worked out that she must have said to the saleswoman, “The account is E.E. Moroney”. She cut out the label and kept it as a souvenir for the rest of her life. Nora Hinchen, Naremburn

David Jones was for the majority of its life run as a family business. My mum was a “lady in black” in the 1960s at its flagship Elizabeth Street store, and as a 14-year-old, I worked there in the school holidays, as did many of the other ladies’ kids. Its chairman, Charles Lloyd Jones, roamed the store with his entourage of department managers. It was like being part of a big family, and service to the customer was the creed. The Jones family sold out, and the corporates took over. A different focus on profit and return on equity was their principal motive. They changed the way the store was managed and operated. This is the result. Richard Talbot, Cremorne Point

Film-maker Sue Milliken’s popular film Ladies in Black is a timely reminder of the established treasures represented by David Jones. Seeing heart-breaking qualities erased by corporate forces over and over again leave our beautiful cities collectively cheapened into the bargain bins. The fabulous Sydney era, especially as represented by the ladies in black, Mark Foy’s, the Regent Theatre, the Trocadero, the Plaza Theatre, the Hotel Australia and many high-style establishments of culture and quality represents upmarket aspirant life at its functional best. The markdown fever represented by the discount grab email sees all generations diminished into silent disappointment. We had better be careful that the Capitol Theatre, Luna Park or the Steyne Ferry are not traded in for “opportunity makeovers” or the ruthless forces will wipe out our best remaining treasures. Paul Brennan, Point Clare

In 1985, I met my husband in the cosmetic department at David Jones; he’d got lost trying to find haberdashery to buy a button for his CBA jacket uniform. So it goes without saying: “There’s no other store like David Jones”. It’s been our motto all these years! Wendy Bull, North Turramurra

Rich can afford cuts

A huge shout-out must go to your economics writer Millie Muroi for her excellent analysis of the roles of the government and Reserve Bank in managing the inflation problem (“Cutting government spending could put the economy in a worse position”, November 7). It was a measured and thoughtful article, free of bias or exaggeration, and should be required reading for all politicians and commentators, the majority of whom, I would suggest, know very little about economics. The suggestions that she quotes from the Australia Institute for cuts to private school subsidies and tax breaks for wealthy superannuants are eminently sensible, but of course any attempt to cut government spending in this way would raise a massive scare campaign from the likes of Tim Wilson, the Murdoch media, One Nation and entitled Baby Boomers, which is probably a fight Albo would be too chicken to take on. When it is all boiled down, any cuts will have to affect someone, and it may as well be those who are most able to afford them. Phil Peak, Dubbo

Targeted species

Recently, I answered an online survey that asked if I, an elderly woman, felt unsafe walking around at night. I was reminded of this when I read Malcolm Knox’s piece (“Why some men can’t park misogyny”, November 7) because where I feel least safe is driving on a public road at 3pm. At this time of day, motorists such as Van Driver Number One are out in force and let it be known that elderly female drivers shouldn’t be on the road. Frequently, I am tail-gated, overtaken at speed on the left, and subject to inappropriate horn-honking and headlight-flashing. Misogyny does not only occur in Malcolm Knox’s street – it is alive and well on the road if you are old and female. Patricia Farrar, Concord

The right of beliefs

What’s galling is that fellow Australians don’t understand that the right of freedom of belief includes the freedom to believe and live by it. To insist that “religion” (whatever they mean by that word) should be kept out of education and medicine is an arrogant assertion of one set of beliefs over another (Letters, November 7). It’s not whether I agree with what Catholic Health thinks; it’s the right of an organisation based on a set of beliefs to act according to them. To insist that such beliefs have no right to a presence in the public space is to damage how our democracy works. It’s the same thing as the state governments in the US making laws that demand that the 10 Commandments be put on every wall in schools. Not everyone believes that abortions or assisted dying are good things and should be available on demand. David Ashton, Katoomba

La vita not so dolce

Pineapple has no place on any pizza ever and nobody should be sacked for refusing to put it there (“‘Insult to my culture’: Italian chef sacked after refusing to put pineapple on pizza”, smh.com.au, November 6). Maryann Gobee, Fairlight

It’s a bit like being sacked for refusing to put fish in a milkshake. Tony Judge, Woolgoolga

• To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
• The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.