Disinformation and the tyranny of officialdom

Tony Abbott meeting Australian troops at Exercise Talisman Soldier in 2015 [Public Domain]

Tony Abbott recently warned us that ‘conservatives must resist [the] tyranny of officialdom’.

This proved timely, as I’ve just experienced unelected and anonymous bureaucrats at the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) publicly endorsing the view that my political opinion constituted ‘disinformation’.

After I urged conservative voters not to splinter the conservative vote at the coming election, the AEC endorsed the labelling of my political opinion as "disinformation" even though what I had to say was not according to their own definition... This is my response.

Writing in the Morning Double Shot newsletter, Terry Barnes had this to say:

As he writes, Michael de Percy is a political scientist. Electoral systems are his business. He made a public statement of the bleeding obvious: because Labor benefits more from Greens and other Left preferences, the higher the Coalition’s primary vote means the better Peter Dutton’s chance of rolling Anthony Albanese. Determined to protect the myth that all preferences matter, the Australian Electoral Commission accused our resident Bearded Wonder of political disinformation. There is something very wrong when unelected officials themselves spout disinformation to ‘combat’ what they deem misinformation – and we dodged a huge bullet late last year, when legislation to entrench such madness was voted down in the Senate.

Meanwhile, writing in the Unfiltered newsletter, Alexandra Marshall had this to say:

How much power should the AEC have over the conversation? At some point they elected themselves as Australia’s digital police, suffocating Twitter and Facebook with their ‘disinformation’ labels. Well, Michael de Percy isn’t very happy with them, referring to the ‘tyranny of officialdom’.

My latest in The Spectator Australia, Disinformation and the tyranny of officialdom.

Disinformation and the tyranny of officialdom | Should the AEC be policing opinion on social media?
----------

Tony Abbott recently warned us that ‘conservatives must resist [the] tyranny of officialdom’.

"This proved timely, as I’ve just experienced unelected and anonymous… pic.twitter.com/Wf95foqXms

— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) January 10, 2025

Our Anglican tradition, and a bit with a possum

St George's Anglican Church in Lisbon

As I prepared to write this article, I went to pour a glass of wine. When I returned to my study, my television had turned itself on. In a black and white movie, the actor was playing a violin, surrounded by children singing, Hark! The Herald Angels Sing. I immediately retold the story to my local padre, an Anglican priest and army chaplain who leads our RSL services. He remarked that it was clearly a sign that I must not be a doubter and that I must tell my story truly and well.

My latest in The Spectator Australia, Our Anglican tradition, and a bit with a possum.

Our Anglican tradition, and a bit with a possum | @FlaneurPolitiq

Identity politics has infiltrated the Anglican tradition. The meaning of the stained-glass window depicting Sir Galahad is disappearing along with veterans.

Christians are disappearing.https://t.co/4nAaELoiyA

— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) January 6, 2025

How to ensure Labor wins the next election

Splintering the vote will undo Menzies’ legacy

The outcome of elections has little to do with supporters of the major parties. Historically, the party that forms government is decided by those who defect from the Coalition. Those who move further left remain within the radical Labor or Greens camps. Unlike the Democratic Labor Party (DLP) of the 50s and 60s, it is unlikely that left-leaning groups would preference the Coalition. This means that those conservatives who move away from the Coalition effectively hand government to Labor.

Labor governments are much like the Teals and other left-leaning independents. They rarely win on first preferences. In practice, Labor governments do not receive a mandate, especially where first preference votes are concerned. The preferential voting system means that deviations in voters’ party loyalties, particularly on the right, helps Labor to win government.

Writing in the Unfiltered newsletter, Alexandra Marshall had this to say:

Speaking of the election, Michael de Percy brings a rather controversial opinion to the table, arguing that we risk undoing Menzies’ legacy if the conservative vote is split between minor parties on the right.

My latest in The Spectator Australia, How to ensure Labor wins the next election.

Splintering the conservative vote will ensure Labor wins the next election, says Michael de Percy.

The preferential voting system gives the impression you can give your first preference to a minor party and still end up with a conservative government.https://t.co/aBoBrtIcE7

— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) January 4, 2025