Multicultural Festival organisers to review stall policy after concerns over anti-slavery tent

The following story is satirical, intended to shame the gross moral standards of a very similar (but not intentionally satirical) article on the ABC today.

The National Multicultural Fair organisers have said they will reconsider requirements for stands after patrons objected to an anti-slavery stand at their weekend fair.

Fair chairman Jane Nguyen acknowledged several people had offically protested about the Victorian Right To Liberty Association stand, located really close to the fairy floss.

A Facebook post claiming the inclusive fair was no place to raise concerns about human rights violations received hundreds of likes and more than a few replies expressing their indignation that someone would make them think about how other people’s basic human rights were being violated.

But Ms Nguyen said most of the protests were specifically about photos designed to make passers by feel even a tiny bit of compassion for the suffering of their fellow humans. The photos even showed slaves looking like real people.

“Of course we wouldn’t want anyone to feel slightly uncomfortable,” Ms Nguyen said.

“Everyone must understand we’re not perfect, and we’ll make sure nobody has to see other people suffering while they’re just trying to eat ridiculously over-priced food next year.

Now we know civilised people don’t like to see the scientific evidence of slaves being living humans too, and not just disposable private property.”

However, Ms Nguyen could not confirm if they already had any procedures to keep out such plainly emotional manipulation, which the exhibitors called biology.

The fair’s rules for exhibitors say stands are approved at the committee’s discretion so they can meet the observed needs. The observed need is usually to sell as much space as possible.

Ms Nguyen stated, “We live in a diverse and equal community. It’s great that some people have different opinions, and it might even be okay to say them out loud in public – but not too often mind you.”

She did not elaborate on whether the anti-slavery stand aligned with the fair’s motto to “help all Victorian minorities and intersectional identifiers celebrate their diversity, tolerance, and moral superiority”.

Ms Nguyen mused that it was odd nobody had complained about the transparently political humanisation of black-people in chains by those exhibitors before, as they’d been there many prior years.

One man who lodged a formal protest to the organising committee said his girlfriend left the fair in tears of anger after seeing the exhibit.

“It was too sharp a reminder of how cheaply we sold the last African we owned together” he said.

‘Unprovoked violence’

“She was hysterical and insisted if she had’ve known they were going to make her feel bad for selling people, she would’ve stayed away. It was unprovoked violence, to politely prompt us to check our consciences like that.”

The lady protested that although people are obviously allowed to disagree with her about the fundamental rights of living humans, they’re hateful bigots to tell her that her opinion, that slavery is okay in some circumstances, is wrong.

“I know we’re trying to pretend to be inclusive and tolerant of other people’s opinions,” her protest states, “but why can’t the committee simply exclude everybody that might disagree with my opinion. Surely it’s predictable that indiscriminately educating people on the basic biology and obvious humanity of slaves is going to upset past or current slave owners or slavery advocates.”

Ideological Relativism Minister Juan Greenway crowed the fair was indeed meant to be inclusive.

“It’s highly inappropriate to subject young children, who have just gotten over the mind-searing abuse of role-playing gender theory with cisgender dolls in government primary schools, with the horrendously anti-science images of black people smiling,” he said.

“Group think demands will be gladly considered by the fair’s organising committee in their debrief, and fully submitted to next year – if they know what’s good for them. These events must be family-friendly, you know.”

Former chairman of the Melbourne Multicultural Community Fete, Sally Woo, said she was in favour of everybody having their their say at the fair.

But she supported the call for it to be restricted to approved opinions only, in the interest of a harmonious society – like China.

“Of course people can force their opinions on us, but only if they’re also our opinions,” Ms Woo, who was a consultant to the fair’s organising committee, said. “So there’s social freedom permitted for everybody we agree with.”

“This is a family event, and we have to trust the committee to decide if families being reminded that slavery treats some human lives like disposable property is really appropriate. It isn’t really appropriate.”

The Victorian Right To Liberty Association was contacted for comment, but you can just guess what they had to say. Probably something about free speech, basic morality, human rights blah blah blah.

Again, this was all fiction, names, places, organisations, everything. It’s intended to highlight the absurdly stranger than fiction reality described in the article linked at the top.