Slogans and Tyranny

Sir: It is one of history’s great ironies that the brutality of Stalin’s socialist regime shaped Dmitri Shostakovich’s genius, gifting us with one of the greatest composers of the twentieth century. Shostakovich was forced to play a game of cat-and-mouse with the Supreme Soviet, a regime that championed his work whilst simultaneously banning it.

The strained echoes of Russian folk music haunting his compositions are symbolic of the Soviets’ attack on romanticism. Marxism derided sentimentality as a bourgeois affectation. It preferred to champion the “rationalist” conceit of social justice through equality. The equality of the Siberian gulags, as it turned out.

The Soviets went as far as to outlaw Christianity because it enshrined romantic love between a man and a woman in holy matrimony. A union made before God outside state control.

In this utopian vision of the world, devoid of humility, there is no poetry, no justice, no God-consciousness. In their stead, cold comfort and dead bodies strewn all around.

Today, in Australia, if you listen to the sloganeering of those functionaries in the arts community willing to demonise the patriarchy in favour of equality and the end of white male privilege, you could swear you were listening to one of Comrade Stalin’s soporific lectures to the Bolsheviks.

Such propagandists in the arts bureaucracy are not really interested in patriarchy theory any more than they are in the creation of art. They’re interested in the acquisition of power.

Government mandarins may insist on their altruism in identifying what “minority” group of musicians deserve to be playing centre stage, but the composition of the piece remains and its execution either pleases or displeases the listener.

It is through the evolution of custom or tradition that the spark of civilisation is maintained. The presumption of innocence, the rule of law and the separation of powers are ideals that protect us from the tyranny of the state. When the ideology of the state elevates itself to the status of a religion, and you can be found “guilty” of “blasphemy” on the basis of an accusation like misogyny, without the protection of due process, then you can be sure that tyranny has prevailed. When the mob is allowed to destroy custom beyond recognition to “liberate” itself from the bonds of “oppression”, a nihilistic force has been released.

For how long can we deny the influence of Cultural Marxists in our institutions? How long can we tolerate those who would do us harm by claiming power on the basis of alleged historical injustice? Power without responsibility is tyranny.

One thing for certain, in these uncertain times, is the need for truth, not propaganda, in art. Shostakovich’s genius lay in the fact that he was able to delineate truth despite the forces of antagonism aligned against him. May we find inspiration in his music to do the same.

Damien Richardson
via e-mail

Sir: This is a reply to John Dorman’s letter to the editor (October 2018). My article on Great British Railway Journeys should have clarified that the Liverpool to Scarborough line, opened in 1830, was “the oldest passenger railway line” in the world. This is how Michael Portillo refers to it in his series. Mr Dorman is correct that the Stockton to Darlington line is the oldest railway in the world, which opened in 1825, however it did not start carrying passengers until 1833. Before that it had been a mixed line of steam (for coal) and horse-drawn traffic (for passengers).

Joe Dolce
North Carlton, Vic

Sir: It was good see the review of Great British Railway Journeys (September 2018). When the series was recommended to me a few years ago, I expected a traditional travel show that couldn’t sustain interest for seventeen, let alone 170 episodes. Was I mistaken!

What’s unusual is that this series has an actual purpose and theme, and an inspiring one at that: the greatness of the Industrial Revolution and the Victorians who brought it about. And what’s especially unusual in this politically correct, anti-capitalist, environmentalist age is that Michael Portillo is unabashedly a champion of industrialisation and productivity. Ever-enthusiastic (but not overly-enthusiastic), he exclaims about “the ingenuity of man” and shows us how the Victorians used science, technology and industry to change the face not only of England but of the world, creating jobs and wealth throughout society and thereby preserving and enhancing the lives of millions of individuals. Portillo’s narrative contributes to a very important political lesson: how much human beings can accomplish if left relatively free to turn their ideas into reality.

Michael S. Berliner
Los Angeles, California

Sir: I remember going to Mass in the 1950s when Catholic priests thundered warnings from the pulpits about the dangers Communist China posed to Australia. “They have their eyes set on ‘The Prize of the Pacific’,” we were told. And I remember the last thing Bob Santamaria said in the last television interview he gave before he died. In response to the final question, “Well, Mr Santamaria, what is going to happen to Australia?” Santamaria replied, “That’s self-evident. They are going to come and take it away from us.”

Phillip Turnbull
Cornelian Bay, Tas

Sir: Christopher Heathcote’s letter on indigenous censorship (September 2018) brings to mind the proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament. One fears that such a voice might stray into fields of ignorance to make similarly insular decisions to the detriment of other Australians.

Nils Marchant
Ocean Reef, WA