Dvir Abramovich: Extreme groups like The National Socialist Network show societal sickness we cannot ignore

On Saturday morning in Sydney, outside the people’s house, a group of men in black uniforms held a banner that read “Abolish the Jewish Lobby” and chanted a Hitler Youth slogan. They stood in formation at the gates of Parliament, filmed themselves, and left after 20 minutes. It was a short show, but the message was long and ugly. It said to every Jewish family walking by with a child, and to every migrant who has made Australia home, that some people want you afraid.

I believe in free speech. I also believe in something older and deeper that healthy countries protect, which is the basic feeling that you belong on your own street. What we saw on Macquarie Street was not a protest about a policy. It was a performance designed to menace neighbours. That matters. It tears at the quiet bonds that let a diverse country live together without looking over its shoulder.

So let me be plain. The National Socialist Network, and groups like it, should be banned. Not debated, not managed, banned. Australia has already said no to the swastika and the nazi salute. It should now say no to uniformed groups who gather to glorify that ideology, recruit for it, and normalise it in our public square.

Here is why.

First, this is not about ideas, it is about intimidation. You can hold any private belief you like in a free society. You cannot turn the steps of Parliament into a stage to celebrate a movement that murdered millions, while telling a minority community they do not belong. When a gang in matching outfits unfurls a banner aimed at a single group and shouts slogans linked to a violent past, that is not an argument. It is a threat. Democracies draw lines against threats for the same reason we lock our doors at night. We love freedom, but we also love coming home intact.

Ban them. Not because we fear their ideas, but because we love the country those ideas are trying to spoil.

Second, we know where this road goes. Intelligence agencies across the world are clear. Groups like these feed on attention, recruit the young online, and sometimes spill from words into action. You do not have to wait for a bomb plot to say enough. In Germany, where people carry the memory of what nazism did, the state dissolves neo-nazi groups as soon as they show their aim is to destroy democracy. In Finland, the courts shut down a violent neo-nazi network. In the United Kingdom, the government classed National Action as a terrorist organisation and put its leaders in prison. These countries did not become less free by making that choice. They became safer.

Third, Australia has already set the direction. Victoria banned the Nazi salute after thugs tried to turn the Parliament steps into a Sieg Heil photo op. The Commonwealth now bans nazi symbols nationwide. NSW has made it a crime to intentionally incite hatred against people because of their race or faith. These are good steps. The rally outside Parliament shows the gap that is left. The symbol can be hidden and the salute can be skipped, but the uniform, the chant and the banner can still be used to send the same message. Banning the groups closes that gap.

Fourth, we have tools that work. Australia does not need to reinvent the wheel. We already use anti-consorting and anti-gang laws to stop bikie gangs from operating as private militias. We treat jihadist networks as terrorist organisations when they glorify violence and recruit. The same logic can apply here. If a group meets the threshold, label it unlawful, ban its uniforms and insignia, criminalise membership and fundraising, and make recruitment a crime. That is not a thought police. It is a public order rule.

Now, some will say, what about free speech. What about the right to protest. Those are good questions. They deserve honest answers.

Australia has plenty of room for protest. People march every week, from cost of living to climate to foreign policy. That is how democracies breathe. This is different. The National Socialist Network is not asking for cheaper tolls or better schools. It is parading a creed that says some people are less than human and that democracy should be replaced by racial rule. A community is not obliged to hand that creed a microphone at its front door.

Others will say, do not give them oxygen. Ignore them and they will go away. If only that were true. Groups like these take silence for permission. They use it to grow. If the first time you act against a group is after someone is hurt, you have acted too late.

Still others will warn that power can be abused. I agree. Any ban must be tightly written and tightly overseen. The definition should be specific. The focus should be on organisations that glorify nazism or advocate racial rule, that organise in uniform to intimidate, that incite hatred or violence. Courts should review listings. Police should report publicly on how powers are used. Peaceful protest and dissent across the political spectrum must stay off limits to these laws. Guardrails matter, and we can build them.

Let me also be clear about what I am not saying. I am not saying arrest people for a bad opinion. I am not saying ban hard debate. I am not saying give police a blank cheque. I am saying there is a narrow class of groups that exist to corrode the foundations we all stand on, and that the right response is not to shrug, it is to act.

There is another reason to move. It is cultural. When a country draws a bright line, it sends a message to children about what we will tolerate and what we will not. There are thirteen-year-olds who saw those men in black at the gates and thought, is that normal now. There are thirteen year olds who saw them and thought, maybe I should join. Law is a teacher. It tells the next generation where the guardrails are. Right now, the guardrails look a little loose.

What would banning look like in practice. Start with the obvious. Make it unlawful to organise, fund, recruit for, or wear the insignia of a listed group. Give police power to disperse uniformed formations that aim to intimidate, not protest. Use anti-consorting orders to break up their cells. Fast track terror listings where criteria are met.

I know some people would prefer to avoid this topic. They worry that talking about it gives fringe groups the attention they crave. I respect that instinct. But there are moments when leadership is saying the obvious aloud. It is saying that the steps of parliament belong to all of us, that our neighbours should not feel afraid to walk there with their kids, and that those who chant Hitler slogans in our streets have no place in our common life.

A good society is not built only on laws. It is built on habits and decency and quiet restraint. It is built on the knowledge that we do not have to look like each other to care about each other’s safety. Laws are just guardrails that protect those habits. This is one of those moments to build a better guardrail.

Ban them. Not because we fear their ideas, but because we love the country those ideas are trying to spoil.

Dr Dvir Abramovich is Chair of the Anti-Defamation Commission