05/28/2024 / By Ethan Huff
The House of Representatives in Australia voted to adopt the Australian Digital ID Law (Digital ID Bill 2024) this week in an 87-56 vote, this after it already passed the Senate.
The plan is to eliminate all forms of physical identification and replace them with digital ID schemes that will put everyone’s most sensitive personal information in one centralized source controlled by the government and private interests.
(Related: Late last year, Brussels rolled out a digital ID prison for Europeans, complete with a Digital Identity Wallet for easy tracking and control.)
A security and privacy catastrophe in the making, the scheme will also aim to digitize and centralize all government services, people’s health insurance plans, tax records and anything else they can cram in there.
The cost to Australia for all this is nearly $200 million, and this is just for the launch. After that, the costs will continue indefinitely, draining taxpayers of even more of their labor.
Members of the Liberal-National Opposition party, which voted against the bill, say their constituents are deeply worried about the privacy implications of the scheme, not to mention their freedoms in general. They also worry that the government will use the digital ID framework to probe their personal lives even more deeply than it already does.
Those in favor of the digital ID framework insist it will add “convenience” to everyone’s lives, but is it really worth it to give up every remaining semblance of freedom and privacy?
For now, participation will remain optional, but that is likely to change in time. These kinds of things always start out this way only to become mandatory once they reach their intended outcome.
The bill as it currently stands will allow people to open bank accounts without digital IDs “by going to the nearest branch,” but what happens when there are no longer any physical bank branches to visit? Physical bank locations are disappearing quickly as they, too, go digital.
Liberal Senator Alex Antic warned about this in discussing the bill’s draconian implications, which combined with the Online Safety Act and the eSafety program will making living in Australia an Orwellian nightmare.
Australia’s censorship matrix exists to “protect the children,” or so we are told, but the reality is that it exists solely for the purpose of allowing the government to decide which content is okay to share online and which is “harmful.”
A new $6.5 million pilot program embedded within Australia’s federal budget will also create an online age verification method called “age assurance technology” that will make accessing certain content online even more difficult. While such a method is good for protecting children from smut and other inappropriate content, it can also be used by the government to restrict other things.
Then there is the “emerging online threats” portion of the federal budget. A total of $43.2 million has been set aside in the budget’s communication package to fight this category of online content, while the eSafety Commissioner’s office will receive $1.4 million over the next two years for its censorship agenda.
Australia is also going after X, ordering the Elon Musk-owned social media platform to remove video footage of the recent stabbing incident at a Sydney church.
X geo-blocked the content within Australia but the eSafety commissioner was not satisfied with just this. A temporary court order was obtained from an Australian federal court to block the video everywhere.
Will the people of the world ever fight back against their tyrannical overlords, or will they just roll over and die? Find out more at Tyranny.news.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under:
Australia, Australian Digital ID Law, big government, Censorship, computing, conspiracy, cyber war, deception, deep state, digital ID, Digital ID Bill 2024, enslaved, EU, freedom, future tech, Glitch, Globalism, information technology, insanity, Liberty, Orwellian, privacy watch, Rule by Secrecy, surveillance, Tyranny, watched
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2017 COMPUTING NEWS