Is the country becoming authoritarian?

I think what the BBC did to Corbyn kinda crushed this notion of political impartiality. After that, the reporting of the Genocide only started to deal in facts, much like the politicians who backtracked, once it became apparent there would be a legel redress. While always of course giving Farage tonnes and tons of publicity for no apparent reason
 
Stuff around the Online Safety Act and the latest farce of the Terrorism Act aren't a good look for encroaching authoritarianism in the UK
 
BlueHammer85 said:
What can you not do or say that you want to ?
Click to expand...
I know you're an advocate of the Online Safety Act, but my issue is around access, not necessarily around me being able to say or not say things. For example, I cannot access r/IsraeliCrimes on reddit anymore due to it needing photo ID verification. I will not do that for 3 main reasons, 1) i do not want to provide my details like that to a 3rd party (no matter how 'reliable' we're told they are), 2) i do not agree with the effective formation of databases of what people access and 3) i do worry about the 'creep' of such powers into other arenas. This is not about whether we should do all we can to fight child pornography, we can leave that to the other threads, but whether the UK has creeping authoritarianism, which i believe it does through the ever increasing amount of rules to fight rules to back up rules etc.

With regards the Terrorism Act, i think it's too broad, and i think it is a bit out of date. We have a nuance here that people are being arrested for supporting Palestine Action, and not because they are standing for Gaza (or against Israel), and that the Police are 'just doing there job'. I mean, if there ever were a more British version of authoritarianism than 'just doing their job', i'd love to hear it. I do not believe PA should be a proscribed terror group, on balance.

I think a lot around the protest laws of the last 2 years are warning signs of a slip towards more intrusive governance, and i thought some of the people arrested around the kings coronation went far too far. Also, the gentle and subtle separation of people into those who "get on with it" and support the country vs those who are disruptive (migrants unspecified, various poorer sections of society and woke liberals) are indicative of the larger culture war theme that will ultimately drive the country to further law making in attempts to solve 'problems'.

So i disagree with your hinted point that I am largely unaffected, as i can still say largely what i like (within our laws), but more that i am becoming restricted in pursuing certain information and undertaking peaceful protest as easily as before. My original point in the first page was that the UK suffers from a very British brand of authoritarianism, through rule making upon rule making, that is not always ill-meant. I think where totalitarianism requires enthusiasm from the populace, flags and so on, authoritarianism is far more passive and is fine with people accepting what they have is ok and chipping away at it until the required level of control is found. Is the UK more authoritarian that 40 years ago? yes, it is. Is is an authoritarian state? no, not yet.
 
philfodenswristsock said:
I've never been one to take much interest in the inane rantings of the Right. But over the years a regular theme from them is the country's lurch to authoritarianism.

Going futher back the 'conspiracy theorists' like David Icke used to warn of moves to bring in laws "for our own protection". The powers that be have been infatuated by ID cards for years, monitoring on the street, on the road, online, in the shops, in our bank accounts, at the work place has certainly snuck in under the radar. Now we are seeing more laws crushing free speech (our traditional way of dealing with the racist Right was to let the pricvks sink themselves and beat them in an argument) Now I'm hearing about some sort of European bill to allow access to private messages etc...

The traditional response to concerns of this nature has been "Well, if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide"... which obviously is nonsense because who gets to decide what's wrong? Will going on strike become wrong, joining a union, expressing concerns about genocide, will being anti war be classed as wrong?

So, what are peoples feelings? Am I becoming paranoid? Is the world really SO dangerous we need rules "for our own protection" What direction is the country really going?
Click to expand...
Interesting question and a few thoughts from me.

Many people are drawn to what can only be described as authoritarian movements. Communism, Fascism and most religions can all be described as authoritarian. So perhaps many people prefer an ordered society where the 'grey' areas (and any dissenters) are removed (many permanently).

Even the so called liberals (the 'woke') have made sensitivity and humour a sackable offence. Recently John Torode, one of the Master Chef presenters, got sacked because he was overheard making an 'offensive' comment. Remember Bernardo Silva got banned for sending Mendy an 'offensive' cartoon. Mendy did not complain but someone else took offence. What about the taking the knee nonsense? If any white footballer did not do it then he would have been roasted alive. What about the death of the joke? Tell a joke now and someone, somewhere takes offence. They are all examples where the rest of us are forced to comply or suffer the consequences of our non compliance. Isn't that authoritarian?

Internet. An absolute cess pit where, similar to us on bluemoon, we all hide anonymously, no names and addresses so that we can say nice things to each other! Is that because we want privacy or is it because we want secrecy because we do not want to 'own' our comments? I'm not sure that free speech is the ability to say what you want anonymously. And I do not think it is authoritarian to call that out.
 
Palerider said:
Interesting question and a few thoughts from me.

Many people are drawn to what can only be described as authoritarian movements. Communism, Fascism and most religions can all be described as authoritarian. So perhaps many people prefer an ordered society where the 'grey' areas (and any dissenters) are removed (many permanently).

Even the so called liberals (the 'woke') have made sensitivity and humour a sackable offence. Recently John Torode, one of the Master Chef presenters, got sacked because he was overheard making an 'offensive' comment. Remember Bernardo Silva got banned for sending Mendy an 'offensive' cartoon. Mendy did not complain but someone else took offence. What about the taking the knee nonsense? If any white footballer did not do it then he would have been roasted alive. What about the death of the joke? Tell a joke now and someone, somewhere takes offence. They are all examples where the rest of us are forced to comply or suffer the consequences of our non compliance. Isn't that authoritarian?

Internet. An absolute cess pit where, similar to us on bluemoon, we all hide anonymously, no names and addresses so that we can say nice things to each other! Is that because we want privacy or is it because we want secrecy because we do not want to 'own' our comments? I'm not sure that free speech is the ability to say what you want anonymously. And I do not think it is authoritarian to call that out.
Click to expand...

Have you watched Gervais recent Netflix ? absolutely goes gung ho on gays, trans etc - its not banned is it ? sure there is some isolated examples and there will always be some that takes offence to something, its been that way forever - you're just now being spoon fed from right wing media and social media these examples and told to blame liberals and 'woke' , which is in my opinion complete bollox and all part of the nauseating culture wars we now live in.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Have you watched Gervais recent Netflix ? absolutely goes gung ho on gays, trans etc - its not banned is it ? sure there is some isolated examples and there will always be some that takes offence to something, its been that way forever - you're just now being spoon fed from right wing media and social media these examples and told to blame liberals and 'woke' , which is in my opinion complete bollox and all part of the nauseating culture wars we now live in.
Click to expand...
But, for authoritarianism to take hold, you need division. Once you’ve got that, and we certainly have, we can elect a government who says it’ll get rid of things/people we don’t like.
It’s a divide and rule strategy that, once implemented, has the possibility to just become a self fulfilling prophecy.
Remember, it couldn’t happen in America, although to succeed it needs the following…
  • A concerted effort by a network of organisations and institutions (governmental, legal, educational, media, business, military, police, religious and cultural institutions, etc.) to legitimise an oppressive system by providing it legal and political support, material resources (i.e. money, communication networks), and human resources (people, skills) to maintain control.
  • A system that is willing to engage in a spectrum of undemocratic practice from corruption and sowing lies and conspiracy theories, to using fear and violence in order to manipulate, divide people, and maintain power.
  • The misuse of the power of the state to advance the personal and/or partisan desires of the head of state or a ruling clique (e.g., persecuting political opponents, subverting honest elections).
  • Often emerges “legally”, by democratically elected leaders who subvert democratic norms and institutions to stay in power.
I would argue we’re not a million miles away from the above, next election result dependent and Starmer using laws meant for one thing, for an entirely different thing, doesn’t help the fight in the slightest.
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
But, for authoritarianism to take hold, you need division. Once you’ve got that, and we certainly have, we can elect a government who says it’ll get rid of things/people we don’t like.
It’s a divide and rule strategy that, once implemented, has the possibility to just become a self fulfilling prophecy.
Remember, it couldn’t happen in America, although to succeed it needs the following…
  • A concerted effort by a network of organisations and institutions (governmental, legal, educational, media, business, military, police, religious and cultural institutions, etc.) to legitimise an oppressive system by providing it legal and political support, material resources (i.e. money, communication networks), and human resources (people, skills) to maintain control.
  • A system that is willing to engage in a spectrum of undemocratic practice from corruption and sowing lies and conspiracy theories, to using fear and violence in order to manipulate, divide people, and maintain power.
  • The misuse of the power of the state to advance the personal and/or partisan desires of the head of state or a ruling clique (e.g., persecuting political opponents, subverting honest elections).
  • Often emerges “legally”, by democratically elected leaders who subvert democratic norms and institutions to stay in power.
I would argue we’re not a million miles away from the above, next election result dependent and Starmer using laws meant for one thing, for an entirely different thing, doesn’t help the fight in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Its not Starmer or this government that has and is creating division, its social media and the media.
Safety laws online which predominately are to protect children from harm are much needed and don't even go far enough for fear of the 'they're trying to silence us' brigade.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Its not Starmer or this government that has and is creating division, its social media and the media.
Safety laws online which predominately are to protect children from harm are much needed and don't even go far enough for fear of the 'they're trying to silence us' brigade.
Click to expand...
I was thinking more about using terrorism laws to arrest masses of people, rather than online safety, to be honest.
Whilst it might well be a good idea to try to improve online safety, a 12 year old looking at porn will suffer less harm than one getting his head stoved in on a march or demonstration, in the name of ‘fighting terror’
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Have you watched Gervais recent Netflix ? absolutely goes gung ho on gays, trans etc - its not banned is it ? sure there is some isolated examples and there will always be some that takes offence to something, its been that way forever - you're just now being spoon fed from right wing media and social media these examples and told to blame liberals and 'woke' , which is in my opinion complete bollox and all part of the nauseating culture wars we now live in.
Click to expand...
We will have to agree to disagree then. For me, the greatest difference between when I started work in the early 70's to retiring in the 2020's is that you could not have a honest discussion with anyone at work in the 2020's. You had to be on your guard as you could be sacked for a bad joke or mentioning one of the unspeakable words. i.e free speech went out of the window and a sort of enforced (authoritarian) culture developed. One of my friends at work got sacked for a mildly sexist remark to a young woman at work. It was probably not even worth a warning but he got sacked and walked off the premises. Totally and utterly over the top but technically we had a zero tolerance (authoritarian?) regime for such remarks. So sacked he was.
 
www.bbc.co.uk

Government expands police use of live facial recognition vans

The Home Office says the technology helps locate suspects but civil liberties groups warn of heightened surveillance.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

Interesting piece today. Welsh police used this against ticket tours at oasis and when questioned the minister responsible, who said that the intent of the tech was to catch serious criminals, said she didn’t know whether it was used to identify routs or not. A tad worrying
 
shemnel said:
I know you're an advocate of the Online Safety Act, but my issue is around access, not necessarily around me being able to say or not say things. For example, I cannot access r/IsraeliCrimes on reddit anymore due to it needing photo ID verification. I will not do that for 3 main reasons, 1) i do not want to provide my details like that to a 3rd party (no matter how 'reliable' we're told they are), 2) i do not agree with the effective formation of databases of what people access and 3) i do worry about the 'creep' of such powers into other arenas. This is not about whether we should do all we can to fight child pornography, we can leave that to the other threads, but whether the UK has creeping authoritarianism, which i believe it does through the ever increasing amount of rules to fight rules to back up rules etc.

With regards the Terrorism Act, i think it's too broad, and i think it is a bit out of date. We have a nuance here that people are being arrested for supporting Palestine Action, and not because they are standing for Gaza (or against Israel), and that the Police are 'just doing there job'. I mean, if there ever were a more British version of authoritarianism than 'just doing their job', i'd love to hear it. I do not believe PA should be a proscribed terror group, on balance.

I think a lot around the protest laws of the last 2 years are warning signs of a slip towards more intrusive governance, and i thought some of the people arrested around the kings coronation went far too far. Also, the gentle and subtle separation of people into those who "get on with it" and support the country vs those who are disruptive (migrants unspecified, various poorer sections of society and woke liberals) are indicative of the larger culture war theme that will ultimately drive the country to further law making in attempts to solve 'problems'.

So i disagree with your hinted point that I am largely unaffected, as i can still say largely what i like (within our laws), but more that i am becoming restricted in pursuing certain information and undertaking peaceful protest as easily as before. My original point in the first page was that the UK suffers from a very British brand of authoritarianism, through rule making upon rule making, that is not always ill-meant. I think where totalitarianism requires enthusiasm from the populace, flags and so on, authoritarianism is far more passive and is fine with people accepting what they have is ok and chipping away at it until the required level of control is found. Is the UK more authoritarian that 40 years ago? yes, it is. Is is an authoritarian state? no, not yet.
Click to expand...
Good post.
 
Palerider said:
We will have to agree to disagree then. For me, the greatest difference between when I started work in the early 70's to retiring in the 2020's is that you could not have a honest discussion with anyone at work in the 2020's. You had to be on your guard as you could be sacked for a bad joke or mentioning one of the unspeakable words. i.e free speech went out of the window and a sort of enforced (authoritarian) culture developed. One of my friends at work got sacked for a mildly sexist remark to a young woman at work. It was probably not even worth a warning but he got sacked and walked off the premises. Totally and utterly over the top but technically we had a zero tolerance (authoritarian?) regime for such remarks. So sacked he was.
Click to expand...

You could argue both are authoritarian to be fair, and in your example it’s hard to argue it’s not for the better.

Personally I’ve found it’s the same as it always was as long as you establish the right boundaries with the people you’re talking to.
 
meltonblue said:
You could argue both are authoritarian to be fair, and in your example it’s hard to argue it’s not for the better.

Personally I’ve found it’s the same as it always was as long as you establish the right boundaries with the people you’re talking to.
Click to expand...
The problem often isnt the people you are talking to but others taking offence on their behalf which is downright crazy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top