Is criticism of ‘hedonistic materialism’ really an extremist position?

The ABC recently reported that Amanda Stoker, the LNP’s candidate for Oodgeroo at the forthcoming October election in Queensland, apparently felt compelled to withdraw her commitment to launch Dr Shimon Cowen’s latest book, A Populism of the Spirit: Further Essays on Politics and Universal Ethics in the Queensland Parliament. According to the ABC, support was withdrawn because of “Dr Cowen’s anti-homosexual views.”

Of course, Ms Stoker’s record in the Federal Parliament, where she served as a Senator representing Queensland, is mostly exemplary as well as courageous. She is a formidable character who was an important vocal critic of the transgender activist lobby and opposed a ban on conversion therapy. Hence, it is really not the purpose of this short article to speculate on the reasons for Ms Stoker’s decision to withdraw from the launch of Dr Cowen’s book.

But the episode certainly provides an opportunity to ruminate on the relentless, ongoing and woke-driven attacks on free speech – the bedrock of Australian society. Labor Minister Shannon Fentiman, commenting on the withdrawal, assumed that Dr Cowen’s views on homosexuality appear to be the primary reason for Ms Stoker’s withdrawal. The Minister sanctimoniously declared that Dr Cowen’s “extreme” views should not be promoted in Parliament. This comment is rather ironic, considering that the Parliament is supposed to be the People’s House and, therefore, should welcome a variety of views that are represented in the society it serves.

Of course, in a supposedly free society, one would expect a vigorous discussion on these issues. However, the treatment of Dr Cowen – a cancellation no less – is just another confirmation that the woke brigade will only ever tolerate one viewpoint, to the exclusion of all others. So much for freedom of speech which, at one time, was a basic building block of our society.


Is launching a book an endorsement of every one of an author’s ideas? Tell us in the comments below.

icon

Join Mercator today for free and get our latest news and analysis

Buck internet censorship and get the news you may not get anywhere else, delivered right to your inbox. It's free and your info is safe with us, we will never share or sell your personal data.

Curiously, this is not the first time Dr Cowen’s views on homosexuality have caused him problems with the woke brigade. In February 2012, Dr Cowen, who held an Adjunct Research Associate position at Monash University’s Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation, lost his academic position for simply using his University email address to express his academic opinion regarding same-sex marriage and asserting, on another occasion, that the “Safe Schools” program in Victoria (an initiative that promotes homosexuality in schools), is unethical and its funding should be investigated.

The LGBTQI+ lobby put an enormous pressure on the University’s Vice-Chancellor, Professor Ed Byrne, “to clearly state that he and Monash university will not tolerate with homophobia in any form, and will sever ties with those associated with Monash University who promote homophobia”. As a consequence, the Monash’s Dean of the Faculty of Arts discontinued Dr Cowen’s honorary appointment, informing him that the University had received “several complaints” concerning his position about same-sex marriage and the implication that his Institute was associated with the University. So much for academic freedom and freedom of speech.

Dr Cowen, a rabbi with a formidable intellect, is the son of former Governor-General, Sir Zelman Cowen OBM. We published a paper by him on the Voice referendum in a book we edited, The Spirit Behind the Voice Proposal, and we both agreed that it was the best paper, with sharp incisive analysis, of that formidable collection of 17 outstanding papers.

It is true that Dr Cowen, in his writings, addresses difficult, yet important social issues, such as feminism, transgender identity, abortion, anti-discrimination laws which prevent religious schools from sacking homosexual teachers, and sovereignty.

The blurb of his book indicates that its theme is that:

“diverse political temperaments within individual societies, and diverse national cultures within world society, can together constitute a civilization, harmonious and luminous because it reflects objective, universal norms. Yet this can be gained only through a 'populism' – a resurgence and reassertion – of the human spirit, which recognizes those universal ethics”.

Specifically, his book criticises “hedonistic materialism” which he believes is responsible for homosexuality, transgenderism, bestiality, paedophilia, and incest. This is a perfectly acceptable theme, and a person should not be cancelled for ruminating on these issues, even if readers disagree with his arguments.

Although the book was launched in September by Graham Young, it is deplorable that there was a capitulation to the unrelenting demands and expectations of the woke brigade that is destroying whatever remains of freedom of speech in this nation. Free speech now means that only views compatible with the woke brigade may be aired in the public arena, and any incompatible views and ideas must necessarily be cancelled.

Furthermore, this is regrettable because the withdrawal indirectly impacts on the freedom of religion rights of Dr Cowen, whose insightful analysis reflects the requirements of his Jewish religion and is supported in sacred religious texts. Moreover, one might say that most of Dr Cowen’s views are mainstream in that they are supported by many people who are, however, afraid to speak up – the silent majority.

In addition, the timing of the withdrawal is unhelpful in view of the current persecution of Jewish people in Australia, especially the discrimination suffered by, and the treatment given to, Jewish students and scholars at Australian universities. The withdrawal nurtures the views of those activists who are anti-Jewish and pro-Palestine and pro-Hezbollah.

It is also troubling that the withdrawal may amount to an exercise in stereotyping. This involves the attribution of certain characteristics to a person, based on that person’s religion or ethnicity. Such an example of stereotyping reveals that, in political circles, a person who makes critical comments about homosexuality, abortion, and gender-transitioning must necessarily be human rights-unfriendly and, therefore, should be cancelled.  

Ultimately, the controversy about Dr Cowen’s book launch exhibits a fear of politicians to be associated with a person whose views are considered to be controversial. If so, our politicians may well be afraid of being deemed to be guilty by association. This, of course, is quite ironic because Dr Cowen, with a general academic background and a PhD in social philosophy, is a highly esteemed conservative academic who knows how to communicate the concept of ancient, eternal, and universal ethics to those raised in a secular culture.

Above all, Dr Cowen is an accomplished conservative intellectual who has drawn freely on the merit of his late father, a former Governor-General of Australia, Sir Zelman Cowen OBM, to gain access to legislators and political forums to speak about Noahide Laws and their application to social policy.

One of his previous books, The Theory and Practice of Universal Ethics (2014), received bipartisanship launches in five of Australia’s six State legislatures. On 5 June 2008, in a letter of support for his impressive academic contributions, the then Governor-General of Australia, Major General Michael Jeffery, stated:

I commend Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen for his research into the universal features of the world religions and his commitment to promoting discussion on the Seven Noahide Laws. These laws, or ethical principles, apply to all contemporary issues and therefore play an important role in our day-to-day lives … I therefore encourage everyone to reflect and discuss these principles and values with respect to how we live our lives, and to more fully understand the contribution of religion to the fundamental values or our society.

As can be seen, and contrary to misperceptions manifested by left-wing politicians like Minister Fentiman, even a former Australian Governor-General highly commends Dr Cowen and encourages everyone to read his academic writings. Dr Cowen’s conservative ideas, therefore, are far from being “extreme”, at least to people who do not belong to the fringes of the ideological spectrum.  However, even if Dr Cowen’s opinions were “extreme” (they are not), the Australian people, as stated in our recent book The Unlucky Country,

“must be free even to speak the unspeakable, especially about social, and political matters. It borders on absurdity to assert that elected representatives of the people may speak outrageously; but the people in whom sovereignty actually resides, and from whom Parliament, MPs and the executive derive their authority, cannot speak freely. However, whilst enjoying freedom of speech due to the special privileges of their elected office, our representatives in Parliament often abuse their prerogatives by denying the same enjoyment of free speech to those who have elected them.

In a truly free and democratic society, of course, launching a book should neither be controversial nor adversely impact on a career, even if the person doing the launch does not always agree with everything discussed in the book.

If the launching of a book were to depend on the content of the book, very few books would be launched: it would be a perfect recipe for not doing anything at all. The withdrawal of support is, then, nothing else but a manifestation of the insidious “cancel culture” environment that results in the authoritarian censorship of conservative values and opinions.


Is launching a book an endorsement of every one of an author’s ideas? Tell us in the comments below.


Gabriël A. Moens AM is an emeritus professor of law at the University of Queensland and served as pro vice-chancellor and dean at Murdoch University.

Augusto Zimmermann is professor and head of law at Sheridan Institute of Higher Education and served as associate dean at Murdoch University. He is also a former commissioner with the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia.

Zimmermann & Moens are the authors of The Unlucky Country (Locke Press, 2024). 

Image credit: Bigstock


 

Showing 4 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Juan Llor Baños
    commented 2024-10-14 05:51:29 +1100
    Very good article!! Congratulations!!
  • Emberson Fedders
    commented 2024-10-10 13:26:32 +1100
    So, let’s be clear here. Amanda Stoker withdrew her support. The government did not force her to withdraw her support. She made this decision herself. She therefore exercised her free speech rights to do so.

    “Of course, in a supposedly free society, one would expect a vigorous discussion on these issues. However, the treatment of Dr Cowen – a cancellation no less – is just another confirmation that the woke brigade will only ever tolerate one viewpoint, to the exclusion of all others.”

    How was this a “cancellation”? Amanda Stoker withdrew her support. Dr Cowan was still allowed to publish. Or are we using the term “cancellation” when you really mean “disagreed”?

    “Specifically, his book criticises “hedonistic materialism” which he believes is responsible for homosexuality, transgenderism, bestiality, paedophilia, and incest. This is a perfectly acceptable theme, and a person should not be cancelled for ruminating on these issues, even if readers disagree with his arguments.”

    It’s also interesting to me that rightists are so determined to fight for free speech that is offensive, rude, or just plain wrong.

    “Furthermore, this is regrettable because the withdrawal indirectly impacts on the freedom of religion rights of Dr Cowen, whose insightful analysis reflects the requirements of his Jewish religion and is supported in sacred religious texts. Moreover, one might say that most of Dr Cowen’s views are mainstream in that they are supported by many people who are, however, afraid to speak up – the silent majority.”

    I would argue that belief in ancient Middle Eastern mythology is hardly mainstream. And come on, but any time someone claims they have the support of the silent majority certainly never does. How could you know that? The majority are being silent on the issue.

    “The withdrawal of support is, then, nothing else but a manifestation of the insidious “cancel culture” environment that results in the authoritarian censorship of conservative values and opinions.”

    No, the withdrawal of support (by private individuals or organisations) is simply an exercise in free speech. The book was not cancelled. Dr Cowen hasn’t been cancelled. This is pretty standard right-wing victimhood, wherein when people express disagreement with a position taken by a rightist, they are accused of cancelling said rightist. It’s a weak argument.
  • Paul Bunyan
    commented 2024-10-10 12:51:35 +1100
    It’s almost funny. Many parents view their children as a legacy. Why else would they value their family name so highly?

    They don’t see children as anything other than objects to show off, like trophies, when they meet friends and family.
  • Gabriël Moens and Augusto Zimmermann