The Metaphysics of Utopia and Ideology

 In this post I will have a look at what has been happening in the debate concerning misinformation and disinformation in the web sphere since my last post: Code of Practice on Disinformation. A Comparative Analysis: Methodological Limitations The public debate between Thierry Breton, the Commissioner [Kommissar] for Internal Market of the European Union (EU) and Mr. Musk’s X (formally Twitter) web platform revolves around the degree to which X is fulfilling its obligations under the EU Digital Services Act (DSA). The manner in which the EU and the press has reported this controversy manifests in the narrative that X is not doing enough to combat disinformation and is not meeting these obligations. As a result, the EU has been forced to take further investigative action in this regard. This narrative is misleading in that not much is being said about what X is doing to balance the moral and democratic value of free expression with the need to combat harmful commentary pos...

October 30, 2023, marks the publication of an epistle entitled Statement by Former Prime Ministers of Australia . This document was signed by six former Australian Prime Ministers; henceforth referred to as the former-PMs. Missing from the list of signatories was the name of one other living former-PM, namely Paul Keating who, when approached refused to put his name to this document. In their commendable effort to bolster social harmony within the context of multi-cultural Australia the former-PMs express sentiments that most Australians would agree with. The aspiration that there be “…. no place in our country for racial or religious hatred,” a nd the “…. tenaciously evil race hatred” that is at the root of antisemitism. So, they are correct in their declaration to “…. Speak for the vast majority of Australians, of all faiths and of none, when we say we stand with solidarity with Jewish Australians at this time…. Likewise, we stand too with the Australian Palestinian community wh...

There has been much ado in the press over the last month or so concerning the Twitter platform (Twitter X) and its alleged inadequacy in tackling the phenomena of disinformation/misinformation. As discussed in my previous post Potency of the European Union's Code of Practice on Disinformation the European Commission’s (EC) has put into place the Digital Service Act (DSA) which came into effect on August 25, 2023. On September 26, 2023, Lisa O’Carroll wrote an article published in The Guardian with the following headline: EU warns Elon Musk after Twitter found to have highest rate of disinformation . Ms. O’Carroll reported: “The EU has issued a warning to Elon Musk to comply with sweeping new laws on fake news and Russian propaganda, after X – formerly known as Twitter – was found to have the highest ratio of disinformation posts of all large social media platforms.” The laws Ms. O’Carroll referred to are those enshrined in the DSA. Ms. O’Carroll made reference to a report that und...

In this post I will discuss the Case for Voting No (No case) in the upcoming Australian referendum on the Aboriginal and Torres Straite Islander Voice ; hereafter referred to as the Voice to be conducted on October 14, 2023.  Voting in Australian elections and referenda is compulsory. The No case is premised on dangers that could manifest from the proposed inclusion of the Voice after Chapter VIII in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. In summary, the concerns are that the Voice will be: Risky Have unknown outcomes Divisive Permanent On the basis of these fears the No case puts forward ten reasons to Vote No. I will look at each of these ten reasons as individual premises of the No case to determine the veracity of each and the degree to which each supports the conclusion that citizens ought to vote No to the Constitutional change. I will show that the reasons, as premises are in the main not justified and as a consequence the conclusion to Vote No remai...

In my previous post Towards an Understanding of CBDCs as a Threat to Freedom and Privacy I discussed concerns that libertarians on the right side of politics have with Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). I pointed out that commentators like Mr. Rand Paul and the Cato Institute argue that CBDCs are risky as they perceive these types of digital currencies to be threats to freedom, privacy and financial security. In this regard decentralised cryptocurrencies are a safer bet in their view. I for my part, in my previous post pointed out that these kinds of threats and privacy concerns also make decentralised digital cryptocurrencies, like BITCOIN risky as well.    Libertarians on the right wing of the political spectrum, as well as most of the mainstream media’s commentary on digital currencies view digital currency technology in terms of how it can benefit individual economic actors and support the capitalist financial system. In this post I will discuss how digital cur...