this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2026

102 points (99.0% liked)

Australia

4828 readers

192 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

bestusername@aussie.zone

eatham@aussie.zone

Nath@aussie.zone

102

Queensland moves to ban pro-Palestine slogan ‘from the river to the sea’ under sweeping new hate speech laws (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 day ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/australia@aussie.zone

44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Laws to be introduced this week include up to two years in prison for distributing, displaying or reciting prohibited phrases to harass or offend

top 44 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] 18107@aussie.zone 12 points 15 hours ago

How long until "please stop killing innocent people" is also considered hate speech.

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 10 points 16 hours ago

Stupid ass government

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The fuck?

I don't understand all of the connotations of the phrase, (I doubt queensland parliamentarians do either). I do understand palestinians ancestral land is bordered by the river and the sea.

That said, this sounds very much like making wrong think a crime. Nobody is allowed to acknowledge that Israel used to be Palestine because that would upset the Israelis.

In Australia in the last decade there has been a movement towards recognising first australians as the traditional owners of the land on which we live and work. It's often mentioned in podcasts, emails, public announcements et cetera. More and more signage has both European and Aboriginal place names.

The term "truth telling" has emerged to describe the practice of acknowledging historical facts rather than pretending they didn't happen.

If a group of indigenous Australians chanted "from the desert to the sea", would that be hate speech ?

[+] sqgl@sh.itjust.works -8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Nobody is allowed to acknowledge that Israel used to be Palestine because that would upset the Israelis.

It never existed as a state. It was "The British Mandate of Palestine".

Am not saying it shouldn't exist as a state in future, just being pedantic with the history.

Jordan is effectively a Palestinian state.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Palestine As A Name Commonly Used Throughout Ancient History

First documented in the late Bronze Age, about 3200 years ago, the name Palestine (Greek: Παλαιστίνη; Arabic: , Filastin), is the conventional name used between 450 BC and 1948 AD to describe a geographic region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River and various adjoining lands. This work explores the evolution of the concept, histories, identity, languages and cultures of Palestine from the Late Bronze Age to the modern era. Moreover, Palestine history is often taught in the West as a history of a land, not as Palestinian history or a history of a people. This book challenges colonial approach to Palestine and the pernicious myth of a land without a people (Masalha 1992, 1997) and argues for reading the history of Palestine with the eyes of the indigenous people of Palestine. The Palestinians are the indigenous people of Palestine; their local roots are deeply embedded in the soil of Palestine and their autochthonous identity and historical heritage long preceded the emergence of a local Palestinian nascent national movement in the late Ottoman period and the advent of Zionist settler-colonialism before the First World War.

Palestine, A Four Thousand Year History - - Nur Masalha Introduction

From Philistia To Provincia ‘Syria Palaestina’ (135 AD‒390 AD)

The administrative province of Roman Palestine During Roman rule in Palestine, and more specifically between 135 AD and 390 AD, Palestine became one of the Provincias of the empire. This is also a period from which many written records were preserved in a variety of languages – Latin, Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew –and also covered in the annals and texts of the new religion of Christianity. By this time the name ‘Palestine’ was more than a millennium old and had substantial currency. During the Roman period the official/administrative name of ‘Palestine’ was consolidated and popularised in Latin and Greek, which were the two lingua francas of the Roman Empire and Eastern Mediterranean. These two languages affected trade, administration, education, religion, architecture, diplomacy, coinage and key place names throughout the Eastern Mediterranean.

Palestine, A Four Thousand Year History - - Nur Masalha Chapter 3

[–] rcbrk@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 52 minutes ago) (1 children)

between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River

Careful there, mate... ~/s~

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

No, I'm not going to apologize for supporting emancipation

[–] rcbrk@lemmy.ml 2 points 49 minutes ago

Nah just reflecting on the absurdity that the mere mention of river and sea may be criminalised by the Queensland government soon.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

It wasn't a self-governing state was my point.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Again, wrong. Maybe do so reading.

Unless you mean state as in nationalism, wasn't a thing until the 19th century. Where Palestine was self-governing under the ottoman empire until British occupation began.

From the Introduction

Conventional wisdoms are often articulated by powerful elites; they are not always based on facts. The conventional wisdom is that Palestine never in its history experienced self-government, political or cultural autonomy, not to mention practical sovereignty and actual statehood. Nothing is further from the truth. As we shall amply demonstrate in this work, over three millennia from the late Bronze Age and until the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948, Palestine enjoyed a great deal of social, political and economic autonomy and also experienced statehood through six distinct, though not mutually exclusive, ways – ways which had a profound impact on the evolution of the ideas of Palestine across the millennia:

• Autonomous economic and monetary systems and the issuing of Palestinian currency: the institution of independent monetary policies and the minting of distinct Palestinian currency were evident in the cases of the coinage of Philistia or Philisto-Arabian in the 6th‒4th centuries BC (discussed in chapter one) and the minting of Arab currency ‘in Filastin’ throughout early Islam (discussed in chapter six).

• Imperial patron‒protégé systems: the construction of patron‒client systems and the rise of local and autonomous regional and urban elites in Palestine, as was in the case of the ‘urban notables’ of Ottoman Palestine. But ultimately, as we shall see in chapter eight, these Ottoman urban elites in Palestine were rule-takers not rule-makers and rule-breakers.

• Administrative, provincial and military autonomy: this is evident throughout the Roman and Byzantine periods in what became widely known as Provincia Palaestina or the Dux Palaestinae, the ‘military commander of Palestine’ (discussed in chapter four), Mutawalli Harb Filastin (“ ”, Military Governor of Palestine) (discussed in chapter six) and in late Ottoman period Palestine with the creation of the autonomous administrative Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem as the key province of Palestine (discussed in chapter nine).

• Palestinian client states: the emergence and creation of several Palestinian client states, partly based on the same patron‒client relationships. Although the types of client states in Palestine and the degree of their subordination to imperial or powerful states varied significantly, the kings of Philistia throughout much of the Iron Age, the client King Herod the Great under the Romans in the 1st century AD (discussed in chapter four), the Ghassanid tribal Arab federate kings (supreme phylarchs) of Palaestina Secunda, Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Tertia in the 6th and early 7th centuries (discussed in chapter five) and to a lesser extent the autonomous regime of Ahmad Pasha al-Jazzar in the 18th century were cases in point.

• Palestinian practical sovereignty and statehood: this was achieved by Daher al-‘Umar following his successful rebellion against Ottoman rule in the middle of the 18th century (discussed in chapter eight).

• Ecclesiastical independence and autocephaly: this was achieved by the Church of Aelia Capitolina and Provincia Palaestina from the mid-5th century following the Council of Chalcedon (discussed in chapter four).

[+] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone -20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If your slogan implies genocide, as your example also does, yes it is hate speech. You cannot undo colonization by disposing the occupiers. Any nation is occupying some native land in one form or another.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

It is an emancipatory slogan that calls for an end to apartheid and for equal rights.

Yousef Munayyer, head of the Palestine-Israel program at the Arab Center Washington D.C., has written extensively about the meaning of the slogan before and since Hamas's attacks on Oct. 7, which led to Israel's current bombardment of the Gaza Strip.

"It's an expression of Palestinian nationalism and it's an expression of a demand for Palestinian freedom or self-determination," said Waxman. "I think Palestinian self-determination need not come at the expense of Jewish self-determination. Nor do I think Palestinian freedom has to be considered a threat to Jewish rights."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/from-the-river-to-the-sea-palestine-1.7033881

Simply put, the majority of Palestinians who use this phrase do so because they believe that, in 10 short words, it sums up their personal ties, their national rights and their vision for the land they call Palestine. And while attempts to police the slogan’s use may come from a place of genuine concern, there is a risk that tarring the slogan as antisemitic – and therefore beyond the pale – taps into a longer history of attempts to silence Palestinian voices.

https://theconversation.com/from-the-river-to-the-sea-a-palestinian-historian-explores-the-meaning-and-intent-of-scrutinized-slogan-217491

The use of the phrase “from the river to the sea” has come under particular scrutiny in the last three months. When Palestinians, or anyone on the left, has used the phrase to demand a free Palestine—as in the popular chant, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”—those on the right have disingenuously argued that it is calling for the death of all Jewish people in Israel.

https://newrepublic.com/post/178243/benjamin-netanyahu-literally-says-from-the-river-to-the-sea

In 2021, the Palestinian-American writer Yousef Munayyer argued that those who saw genocidal ambition in the phrase, or indeed an unambiguous desire for the destruction of Israel, did so due to their own Islamophobia.

It was instead, he argued, merely a way to express a desire for a state in which “Palestinians can live in their homeland as free and equal citizens, neither dominated by others nor dominating them”.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/31/from-the-river-to-the-sea-where-does-the-slogan-come-from-and-what-does-it-mean-israel-palestine

Preventing any possibility of a Palestinian state has always been Israel’s policy, one that the settlement building in the Occupied Territories is meant to ensure. This policy has been intensified under Benjamin Netanyahu, who in January 2024 publicly vowed to resist any attempt to create a Palestinian state and to maintain Israeli control from the river to the sea.

It is often maintained that the slogan ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ expresses a genocidal and antisemitic intention. But this is generally not the case. On the contrary, the slogan has historically been used to articulate a wide variety of political strategies for Palestinian liberation

Denying such demands seems as self-evident to most Israeli Jews as the air they breathe. It is this denial that has led to the dehumanization of Palestinians and has culminated in the genocidal mood that is prevailing in Israeli Jewish society today and in the assault taking place now in Gaza. This should be viewed as the real problem and not the legitimate chant of ‘from the river to the sea: Palestine will be free’.

https://revdem.ceu.edu/2024/03/27/from-the-river-to-the-sea-one-slogan-many-meanings/

[–] AudaciousArmadillo@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

If you want to say "Free Palestine", you could say "Free Palestine". "From the river to the sea" is also used by Israel and I bet I don't have to convince you as hard that they aren't talking about peaceful co-existance.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

See here

Yeah, it's not a surprise that ethnosupremacist fascists dedicated to ethnic cleansing use their twisted version as a call for even more ethnic cleansing.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You're going to have to elaborate on how "from the desert to the sea" implies genocide.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It doesn't, any more than "from the river to the sea".

The only way you can think "river to sea" slogan implies genociding the Israeli occupiers is if you can't possibly imagine any other way to transfer ownership than brutal imperialistic colonizer-like expansion. You know, like what Israelis are currently doing to Palestinians.

Framing it as "you're calling for genocide" is just another way zionists try to conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

It seems to me like people like this are telling on themselves that they're stuck in Colonial/imperial mindsets and lack imagination.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In the 1960s and 70s it became the signature phrase of the Palestine Liberation Organization to indicate the replacement of the State of Israel with a State of Palestine extending “from the river to the sea,” including the expulsion of Jews.

Hamas have since called for the expulsion of all Jews.

Hamas proclaims it in its 1988 founding, charter document, The Hamas Covenant. The second paragraph declares to all the world that, “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.” The introduction section promises “[o]ur struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious” and will only end when “the enemy is vanquished and Allah’s victory is realized,”

[+] CannonFodder@lemmy.world -8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It refers to genociding the Jews to get back the area. Technically it doesn't, like saying 'all lives matter' isn't technically anti-black, but it is. Wearing a swastika might mean you support the Hindu notion of well-being, but it doesn't.
Symbols have meaning and hiding behind technicalities allows dog whistling and regressive behavior.
Yes, Israel is abhorrent in its actions in Gaza, and a form of shared peaceful cohabitation in the area would be ideal. But allowing slogans that are known to represent genocide, doesn't help.

[–] GlenRambo@jlai.lu 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Sure. But at some point the symbol takes on a new meaning. No one (in the west) is wearing a hindu peace symbol, thats no longer the intent/meaning of that symbol.

And I'd say 99% of people in Australia saying river to the sea aren't supporting the original intent of the Hamas documents and ideals.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world -1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

They know the connotation. They are supporting Hamas. If they had an aversion to supporting Hamas, they'd steer clear of it. It's clear dog whistling.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 13 hours ago

I didn't see any anti Hamas sentiment at the Harbour Bridge march.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz -2 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

It means there won't be any Israelis left between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

Hamas's stated purpose for existing is to vanquish not only the state of Israel, but all Israelis and more broadly all Jews. That's overtly genocidal.

And before you call me a zionist, I don't support the Israeli government. What it's doing to Palestinians is atrocious. But I'm capable of discerning between Israelis and the the Israeli government, just like I'm capable of discerning between Palestinians and Hamas.

Israelis and Palestinians alike deserve peace, justice, security, autonomy, and self-determinism, just like every other human being in the world deserves these things.

The Israeli government and Hamas, on the other hand, are both genocidal organizations and need to be replaced with something more civilized.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

The history of harassment, Palestine, and israel is largely irrelevant.

If a law prescribes (proscribes?) specific phrases regadless of intent and context, they should be chosen very, very carefully.

Im not an expert, but i think other states require a context like "intended to incite hatred".

By prescribing this particular phrase, even if you are correct, it allows harassment to portray Palestine as ignored and persecuted - the very intention of terrorism.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz -1 points 15 hours ago

Should people be allowed to use nazi slogans at protests? What about racist slogans?

I understand it's dicey to draw a line somewhere, but do you really believe hate speech should be protected as political speech? It's a slippery slope either way, the trick is to find the point of balance.

And repeating a phrase which initial intent is to call for the eradication of an entire ethnic group is, in my opinion, on the side of the line that should be considered hate speech, promoting violence, and shouldn't be protected.

The history of the conflict is indeed relevant. And the proscription of the phrase isn't being done "regardless of intent and context."

(By the way, 'proscribe' means to condemn something; 'prescribe' means doctor's orders)

I'm not following the logic of your last paragraph.

[–] Aussieiuszko@aussie.zone 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

No it doesn't. It means the land won't be owned by Israel.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 11 hours ago

And what do you think the plan is for all the Israeli civilians who are currently living there?

Do you expect a Hamas-led government to treat them with basic dignity and respect for human rights?

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

From the Indian to the Pacific Australia will be Aboriginal specific.

⬛
🟡
🟥

Get packing, Whitey🧨 💥

[–] itsathursday@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Where’s all the people that were saying that these laws only would apply if the people involved were part of a recognised hate group?

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That is a recognized hate slogan. Western activists claim it is ambiguous. Discuss.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Recognized by who, dumbass?

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works -2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Recognized by historians, recognized by PLO and by Hamas.

https://sh.itjust.works/comment/23659778

No need to have Redditor teenager style swearing here.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

You didn't answer my question, and you are a dumbass. The "proof" you linked is just more baseless assertions, and none of them support the idea that any slogan calling for a free Palestine is actually coded language that actually refers to expelling all the Jews.

Really, it's just projection. The Israeli project is the expulsion of all Arabs from Gaza and the West Bank, and they've said it openly. To quote Yoav Gallant, "We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly... There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed." That quote encapsulates both statement of intent to commit genocide, as well as genocidal dehumanization. Yet it's always pro-Palestinian speech that's suppressed and criminalized - pro-Israel speech is not subjected to the same "actually, this means this" standard, despite how the Israeli state is both genocidal in intent and actively undertaking genocide.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

dumb as fuck

[–] Luniio@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The same activists who claim this is a totally peaceful statement claim "From the river to the Sea, Israel will be free" is appalling and horrifying.

They know what they are doing.

[–] Luniio@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

"🎵 FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA, ISRAEL WILL BE FREE 🎶"

What... You are outraged by this song ? Why?

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Israel is a genocidal fascist ethnostate and it should be dissolved and their government arrested, tried for crimes against humanity, and executed. This is the absolute bear minimum any human should accept. We should not tolerate these actions.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 6 hours ago

What do you think should happen to Hamas?

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz -1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Do you mind telling the audience what your plan entails for all the Israeli civilians living in Israel, many of whom don't approve of their government or its actions?

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

They would become citizens of the state formed after the dissolution of Israel with the same, full rights and protections, as Palestinians. There would no doubt need to be a whole denazification campaign that might take many years, as well as a very comprehensive period of truth and reconciliation.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 11 hours ago

So you're in favor of a one-state solution?

Who do you think will govern that state?

[–] prex@aussie.zone 0 points 1 day ago

Ha. "Between river and sea" is the motto of Mosman Park council in WA.
Hate crime?