Society as we know it to collapse within 20 years

"society noun (societies)
1 humankind as a whole, or a part of it such as one nation, considered as a single community.
2 a division of humankind with common characteristics, eg of nationality, race or religion.
3 an organized group or association, meeting to share a common interest or activity • I'm a member of the gliding society.
4 a the rich and fashionable section of the upper class;
4 b the social scene of this class section;
4 c as adj • a society wedding.
5 formal company • He prefers the society of women.
6 ecol a small plant community within a larger group.

ETYMOLOGY: 16c: from French societe, from Latin societas, from socius companion."


i fall into category 5.
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
Isn’t that the name for a swamp dwelling primitive species who come from Salford, that has also been sighted in Essex?
Click to expand...
No...that's 'pond life' you're thinking of.
Actually...come to think of it, I've got a pond, and the life in it is far more pleasant than what you're referring to.
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
Sorry mate but we are objectively, categorically absolutely nowhere near “three quarters of the way” to living in a dictatorship.

Our political system has deep problems but compared to most other places in the world, the UK is a haven of freedom. Why do you think millions of people around the world risk life and limb to come and live here?

File that alongside calling people “fascists” willy-nilly. It’s insulting to people who suffer under actual dictatorships and totalitarian regimes.
Click to expand...
We have a bent electoral system. This includes recent legislation to make it more difficult for some people to vote and there are suggestions this could be extended.
We have laws that can be used to stop demonstrations, with some pretty hefty penalties.
We have anti-terrorist laws that can be stretched well beyond their intended target to include non-violent direct action.
We have enabling powers that the government can invoke at any time, as it did during lockdown. There is virtually no restraint. BTW, Blair put this legislation through, not the Tories. The government merely has to decide there is a 'national emergency' and they get to decide if there is one.
There are heavy restrictions on trade union activities, way more stringent than in most Western democracies.
The media is in the hands of a clique, and the government can forbid the publication of anything it deems a 'security matter' anyway.
Much of what the government and royal family have done in the past will not be released in our lifetimes. (This includes Edward VIII's dodgy dealings.)
We have some of the most extensive surveillance systems in the world. In the world, not just the 'free' world. They could easily track your movements if they wished.
The internet is now censored. 'They' get to decide what is 'harmful', not us. They can extend the scope whenever they want.
The DWP can spy on your bank account. It doesn't need a judge to approve this, you just need to be on a state pension or any benefit.
Anyone with dual citizenship can, potentially, be stripped of UK citizenship and thrown out.

Nearly all of this has been developed in recent years. Do you seriously think the trajectory is towards more freedom? If you don't want to use the word 'fascist' - fine. Call it 'profoundly authoritarian' instead. You can always pretend it's the work of lefties if you like.
 
BrianW said:
Anyone with dual citizenship can, potentially, be stripped of UK citizenship and thrown out.
Click to expand...


I'd remove the dual citizenship ability, if you're a UK citizen that's what you are, stops the passport of convenience shenanigans.

Identity cards should be brought in so that everyone can vote, these cards should be free to every UK citizen.
 
BrianW said:
We have a bent electoral system. This includes recent legislation to make it more difficult for some people to vote and there are suggestions this could be extended.
We have laws that can be used to stop demonstrations, with some pretty hefty penalties.
We have anti-terrorist laws that can be stretched well beyond their intended target to include non-violent direct action.
We have enabling powers that the government can invoke at any time, as it did during lockdown. There is virtually no restraint. BTW, Blair put this legislation through, not the Tories. The government merely has to decide there is a 'national emergency' and they get to decide if there is one.
There are heavy restrictions on trade union activities, way more stringent than in most Western democracies.
The media is in the hands of a clique, and the government can forbid the publication of anything it deems a 'security matter' anyway.
Much of what the government and royal family have done in the past will not be released in our lifetimes. (This includes Edward VIII's dodgy dealings.)
We have some of the most extensive surveillance systems in the world. In the world, not just the 'free' world. They could easily track your movements if they wished.
The internet is now censored. 'They' get to decide what is 'harmful', not us. They can extend the scope whenever they want.
The DWP can spy on your bank account. It doesn't need a judge to approve this, you just need to be on a state pension or any benefit.
Anyone with dual citizenship can, potentially, be stripped of UK citizenship and thrown out.

Nearly all of this has been developed in recent years. Do you seriously think the trajectory is towards more freedom? If you don't want to use the word 'fascist' - fine. Call it 'profoundly authoritarian' instead. You can always pretend it's the work of lefties if you like.
Click to expand...
Although I respect your points, from your perspective, what's the point of having a government at all if it can't make decisions?
Your argument comes across as an, "I should be able to do as I please" attitude.

The government merely has to decide there is a 'national emergency' and they get to decide if there is one.

What do you propose, a referendum every time a decision has to be made?


The DWP can spy on your bank account. It doesn't need a judge to approve this, you just need to be on a state pension or any benefit.

If you have nothing to hide, then why is this an issue?


We have anti-terrorist laws that can be stretched well beyond their intended target to include non-violent direct action.

I’d rather anti-terrorist laws stretch wherever they see a threat to be honest.
 
Oh dear.

One safeguard would be judicial review so the government cannot act arbitrarily. I do not trust politicians. They are greedy for unlimited power. Do you know we have been resisting the concept of arbitrary government since the 17th century? Amazing that some people want it back just because they think it would solve certain problems. If you trade freedom for security you deserve neither and will not have either.

Nothing to hide? On that logic, I should not mind (and nor should you) if the coppers come around to your house and search the entire gaff. Why not? You've nothing to hide. Do you really trust authority that much? I don't, as they are corrupt twats. You should also put your diary on the Internet. After all, nothing to hide. And your credit card data. Nothing to hide. Maybe we could all live in transparent houses with no curtains. Why not? Nothing to hide.

Anti-terrorist laws are fine in principle. The snag is when they are stretched to the point where they catch dissidents who do not intend any violence. It's easy to stretch them to cover all sorts of things. People should be allowed to dissent as long as they are peaceful. Increasingly, we are seeing objections to peaceful protests. Ideally, this government - let alone a worse one that is not that hard to imagine - would like no dissent or protest at all.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.