An elected dictatorship.

[DesEsseintes]

In Britain, the Tories, elected with less than 37% of the vote and with a small majority, have been in power less than a week. In that time they have already:

1) Set out a timetable for getting rid of our human rights;
2) Promised to reject an EU plan to take our fair share of desperate migrants fleeing the Middle East;
3) Promised to bring in data mining laws enabling GCHQ to use any private data it wishes, without any reason having to be given other than a catch-all 'national security';
4) Sought to take revenge against the Guardian newspaper and its search for a tiny chink of light into the unconstitutional lobbying of the heir to the throne by bringing in a generalized assumption against any Freedom of Information requests in this area;
4) And the crowning glory on this shit pile, announced today, a generalized law against 'extremist thought'. Yes, you read that right. In the Prime Minister's own words:

'The aim is to catch not just those who spread or incite hatred on the grounds of gender, race or religion but also those who undertake harmful activities for the “purpose of overthrowing democracy”.

'They would include a ban on broadcasting and a requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web and social media or in print.

'For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.'

(My bold.) Absolutely chilling. And this is only the very beginning. More free schools, EU referendum, more private healthcare in the NHS leading to its total abolition with TTIP, and an unspecified further £12 billion of welfare cuts are all in the pipeline.

I hope all those who voted for them are happy. It took God six days to make the world, we are told. It's taken the Tories six days to dismantle it.

 

[mrangry]

Bet they won't include the Daily Mail in their category of inciting hate though will they? Agree 100% with what you say. I despair sometimes of this country...

 

[JackLuis]

Sounds like the Reagan Revolution we had here a while back, only more English in it's disregard for rights.

 

[1sickbastard]

Sounds like the Reagan Revolution we had here a while back, only more English in it's disregard for rights.

I thought the Brits already did that with Maggie Thatcher.
That would make this more like the English equivalent of Bush II and the Patriot Act (aka, act like what we say a patriot should, or else).

 

[Adre]

So an elected government has no business initiating their agenda? Interesting.

 

[AllyRose]

"The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism."

 

[DesEsseintes]

So an elected government has no business initiating their agenda? Interesting.

Where did I say that? They have a legal right to do as they please - our system does not have the checks and balances of European PR systems, nor the built-in braking mechanisms of the US system. But, whereas governments with a landslide majority might feel entitled to introduce major, divisive, sweeping reforms, this Tory party wished to transform the country even in their previous incarnation as part of a coalition. The old days of the party being conservative by nature as well as name, and adopting a steady-as-she-goes attitude, are unfortunately long gone.

Moreover, I believe freedom of speech, human rights, and the right to privacy transcend party politics. It is hubristic to think that a narrow election victory gives them the right to destroy such fundamental and, until recently, non-partisan essentials of our polity.

 

[DesEsseintes]

I thought the Brits already did that with Maggie Thatcher.
That would make this more like the English equivalent of Bush II and the Patriot Act (aka, act like what we say a patriot should, or else).

That would be the closest equivalent, yes, only in the absence of any written constitution, and without any checks and balances, the Tories can go much further.

"The greatest threat to freedom is the absence of criticism."

Perfectly put, madam. If we do not have fierce debate then there is no freedom.

 

[1sickbastard]

That would be the closest equivalent, yes, only in the absence of any written constitution, and without any checks and balances, the Tories can go much further.


Perfectly put, madam. If we do not have fierce debate then there is no freedom.

Well, sorta (referring to the written constitution point), except that the Constitution only applies if it's brought up in a Federal court and whatever rulings are supported by the SCOTUS AND the Executive branch. Or to paraphrase the late Andrew Jackson's thoughts on the Supreme Court, "Let'em enforce their own decisions."

Still, it's better than nothing


And yes, Ally nailed one essential pillar of modern democracy.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

Frightening list

The right to strike and 8 other things at risk under the new Tory government

1. The right to strike

New Business Secretary Sajid Javid has proposed making “significant changes” to strike laws. Under government plans strikes involving public services would need the backing of 40 per cent of eligible members to go ahead. Union leaders have warned employees will have no more rights than “Oliver Twist when he asked for more” under the proposals. Such thresholds would also make the majority of the coalition’s police and crime commissioner elections invalid.

2. Privacy

A Bill that would give the government more surveillance powers - known as the Snoopers’ Charter - is now back on the agenda, according to Theresa May. It is thought the legislation would force British internet service providers to retain large amounts of data about their customers which would be available to the government and security services.

3. Independent thought

David Cameron told his National Security Council on Wednesday that they were planning to target people who did believe in “certain values”. “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone,” he said. “Whether they are violent in their means or not, we must make it impossible for the extremists to succeed.”

4. The Human Rights Act

The Government plans to abolish the Human Rights Act, which guarantees the right to life, liberty, a private life and a fair trial, and replace it with a new British Bill of rights.

5. Rights for migrants

Home Secretary May has claimed migrants who risk their lives crossing the Mediterranean to reach Europe should be returned home. More than 1,800 people have died trying to cross the Mediterranean since January.

6. Jobseekers’ allowance for young people

The Government plans to slash benefits by £12bn, and ITV News reports one proposal would see job seekers’ allowance (JSA) scrapped for 18-21-year-olds and replaced by a six-month allowance.

7. Housing benefit for young people

Another proposed cut would hit the right of those under 21 to claim housing benefit.

8. Foxes

The Government plans to bring back fox hunting.

9. FOI

Downing Street said on Wednesday that ministers would amend Freedom of Information (FOI) laws to strengthen the government’s ability to block documents from being published. The decision comes after the Supreme Court ruled that some of Prince Charles’s letters to ministers from 2004-5 should be published under FOI laws.

http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...sk-under-the-new-tory-government--g1lVxlYelbW

This is the creepiest thing David Cameron has ever said

Today in politicians say the creepiest things, David Cameron is actually going to tell his National Security Council this as he announces plans to crack down on radicalisation.

According to a briefing, Cameron is expected to say:

For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. It’s often meant we have stood neutral between different values. And that’s helped foster a narrative of extremism and grievance. This Government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.



http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...thing-david-cameron-has-ever-said--e1q_01xlZZ


Today in politicians say the creepiest things, David Cameron is actually going to tell his National Security Council this as he announces plans to crack down on radicalisation.

According to a briefing, Cameron is expected to say:


He will say Britons believe in “certain values”, adding: “To belong here is to believe in these things. And it means confronting head-on the poisonous Islamist extremist ideology. Whether they are violent in their means or not, we must make it impossible for the extremists to succeed.”


It’s expected Cameron will introduce a counter-extremism bill in his Queen’s Speech later in May. Planned measures include introducing new orders to ban extremist organisations and restrict people who seek to radicalise youngsters.

The new package is expected to include:

The introduction of banning orders for extremist organisations who use hate speech in public places, but whose activities fall short of proscription.

New Extremism Disruption Orders to restrict people who seek to radicalise young people;

Powers to close premises where extremists seek to influence others;
Strengthening the powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities who misappropriate funds towards extremism and terrorism;
Further immigration restrictions on extremists;

A strengthened role for Ofcom to take action against channels which broadcast extremist content.

 

[DesEsseintes]

One has to admire their commitment to evil. Others just talk about evil, but these guys are there day in day out, really making a difference.

Just because it's worth repeating: the British people voted for this. They want these things to happen. Chilling.

 

[Busybody]

I see nothimg wrong with the agenda

 

[Adre]

The kingdom will survive, have a drink and take off your bunched knickers.

 

[1sickbastard]

I see nothimg wrong with the agenda

Of course you don't
You're an idiot.

The kingdom will survive, have a drink and take off your bunched knickers.

Des isn't worried about the survival of the kingdom, he's worried about the survival of the democracy it took centuries for the non-aristocracy to enjoy.
There's just a bit of a difference.

 

[Adre]

Des isn't worried about the survival of the kingdom, he's worried about the survival of the democracy it took centuries for the non-aristocracy to enjoy.
There's just a bit of a difference.

You're so very kind to explain this nuanced differentiation. How may I thank you?

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

*reads about what the Tories have done, before they won, and what they plan to do*

Yes, evil.

 

[1sickbastard]

You're so very kind to explain this nuanced differentiation. How may I thank you?

More cowbell would do nicely.

And you're welcome.

 

[patient1]

4) Sought to take revenge against the Guardian newspaper and its search for a tiny chink of light into the unconstitutional lobbying of the heir to the throne by bringing in a generalized assumption against any Freedom of Information requests in this area;

Please explain- Is Prince Charles subject to F of I requests now, and the Torries want to provide him with privacy while at the same time taking away every one else's, or is this a metaphor for something else?


Sounds to me like Orwell was bad with dates, but otherwise prescient.


So is Scotland going to reconsider it's independence? Or are they waiting for the 12 billion in cuts first?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Frightening list

The right to strike and 8 other things at risk under the new Tory government

1. The right to strike

New Business Secretary Sajid Javid has proposed making “significant changes” to strike laws. Under government plans strikes involving public services would need the backing of 40 per cent of eligible members to go ahead. Union leaders have warned employees will have no more rights than “Oliver Twist when he asked for more” under the proposals. Such thresholds would also make the majority of the coalition’s police and crime commissioner elections invalid.

This doesn't make any sense. Shouldn't a strike have the support of a majority of workers before being called?
<Snip>

4. The Human Rights Act

The Government plans to abolish the Human Rights Act, which guarantees the right to life, liberty, a private life and a fair trial, and replace it with a new British Bill of rights.

I don't believe that.

5. Rights for migrants

Home Secretary May has claimed migrants who risk their lives crossing the Mediterranean to reach Europe should be returned home. More than 1,800 people have died trying to cross the Mediterranean since January.

This makes no sense. The migrants go to Greece or Italy or maybe Spain. They would be thousands of miles away from UK.

6. Jobseekers’ allowance for young people

The Government plans to slash benefits by £12bn, and ITV News reports one proposal would see job seekers’ allowance (JSA) scrapped for 18-21-year-olds and replaced by a six-month allowance.

7. Housing benefit for young people

Another proposed cut would hit the right of those under 21 to claim housing benefit.

Do you mean to say the gov. hands out money to recent graduates and those looking for housing? Wow!

8. Foxes

The Government plans to bring back fox hunting.

9. FOI

Downing Street said on Wednesday that ministers would amend Freedom of Information (FOI) laws to strengthen the government’s ability to block documents from being published. The decision comes after the Supreme Court ruled that some of Prince Charles’s letters to ministers from 2004-5 should be published under FOI laws.

http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...sk-under-the-new-tory-government--g1lVxlYelbW

This is the creepiest thing David Cameron has ever said

Today in politicians say the creepiest things, David Cameron is actually going to tell his National Security Council this as he announces plans to crack down on radicalisation.

According to a briefing, Cameron is expected to say:

For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. It’s often meant we have stood neutral between different values. And that’s helped foster a narrative of extremism and grievance. This Government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.



http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...thing-david-cameron-has-ever-said--e1q_01xlZZ


Today in politicians say the creepiest things, David Cameron is actually going to tell his National Security Council this as he announces plans to crack down on radicalisation.

According to a briefing, Cameron is expected to say:


He will say Britons believe in “certain values”, adding: “To belong here is to believe in these things. And it means confronting head-on the poisonous Islamist extremist ideology. Whether they are violent in their means or not, we must make it impossible for the extremists to succeed.”


It’s expected Cameron will introduce a counter-extremism bill in his Queen’s Speech later in May. Planned measures include introducing new orders to ban extremist organisations and restrict people who seek to radicalise youngsters.

The new package is expected to include:

The introduction of banning orders for extremist organisations who use hate speech in public places, but whose activities fall short of proscription.

New Extremism Disruption Orders to restrict people who seek to radicalise young people;

Powers to close premises where extremists seek to influence others;
Strengthening the powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities who misappropriate funds towards extremism and terrorism;
Further immigration restrictions on extremists;

A strengthened role for Ofcom to take action against channels which broadcast extremist content.

I didn't know fox hunting was illegal.

Some of these other ideas sound like what Liberals advocate in the US.

 

[JackLuis]

The arguments against the Human Rights Act are coming. They will be false

In the aftermath of the second world war, nations came together to say “never again”. They established the United Nations and agreed a simple set of universal standards of decency for mankind to cling to: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These standards were intended to protect the individual from the state, to uphold the rights of minorities and to provide support for the vulnerable.

The idea was simple; these standards would first be enshrined in regional treaties such as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and then be given legal effect in every country. In the UK this was achieved when Labour enacted the Human Rights Act (HRA) in 1998.

1998? WTF, it is as if the British cling to their tradition of fucking the lower class while wanting the Royals to be... well Royal.

 

[AllyRose]

The kingdom will survive, have a drink and take off your bunched knickers.

I'm pretty sure that was also said by Chamberlain while the Nazis were playing an IRL version of Risk.

 

[AllyRose]

The kingdom will survive, have a drink and take off your bunched knickers.

First they came for the Extremists...
And I did not speak out...
Because I was not an Extremist.

 

[1sickbastard]

I'm pretty sure that was also said by Chamberlain while the Nazis were playing an IRL version of Risk.

I would venture to guess he was more concerned about not seeing another 10 million soldiers of the British Empire being slaughtered in the trenches of the Western Front. Certainly more individuals within the British gov't were less concerned about the evils of fascism than they were about the evils of communism, nor were they overly concerned about the fate of Germany's Jews.

 

[oggbashan]

This doesn't make any sense. Shouldn't a strike have the support of a majority of workers before being called?
<Snip>

That isn't necessary at present. A simple majority of those who have voted is enough, even if only 30% of the membership voted.

I don't believe that.

It's true. The European Human Rights legislation has been used by criminals, and illegal immigrant criminals, to pervert justice in the UK. It has also been used by others to prevent injustice by the UK Government. It means that the European Court of Human Rights can overrule the highest UK Court - and it does.

The proposal is to repeal the legislation that gives the ultimate decision to the European Court of Human Rights and replace it by a UK Bill of Human Rights which we have never had. The proposal is to remove the excesses such as a criminal immigrant claiming his family life will be adversely affected if deported to his country of origin because he has a girlfriend (and one notorious claimant tried for just a cat!) in the UK. The UK Court of Appeal will be the highest level.

This makes no sense. The migrants go to Greece or Italy or maybe Spain. They would be thousands of miles away from UK.

The European officials are proposing to spread the immigrants around the countries of the EU, sending perhaps 20,000 a year to the UK. Since the Government was elected last week on a platform of reducing immigration, and UKIP got nearly 4 million votes for rejecting most immigration, the new UK government has a strong mandate for telling Europe to get lost.

Italy and Greece cannot cope with the hundreds of thousands trying to enter Europe illegally.

Do you mean to say the gov. hands out money to recent graduates and those looking for housing? Wow!

Yes. The government does - to unemployed school leavers who have never had a job. They propose to stop that for new school leavers.

Housing Benefit is paid to those on low incomes to help with renting private accommodation with restrictions on the size of property. It helps Landlords charge higher rents. The last government put a cap, an upper limit, on such claims for which some families were receiving thousands of pounds a week to stay in properties most hard working families could never afford.

I didn't know fox hunting was illegal.

It is. It is almost as contentious as family planning is in parts of the US, with masked demonstrators violently attacking fox hunters who are following a drag (scent) trail and accidently find a fox which the foxhounds naturally chase. The masked demonstrators sometimes become victims as the fox hunters retaliate. The charity RSPCA has lost supporters for expensively pursuing fox hunts through the courts for breaching the law.

Some of these other ideas sound like what Liberals advocate in the US.

Our current laws on Free Speech protect those inciting Muslims to join ISIS or Al-Queda. There are a few individuals who are very dangerous but are beyond the current laws. We did have 'Control Orders' but those were deemed illegal - by the European Court of Human Rights - and replacement controls were blocked by the Liberal Democrats in the coalition. We need something to tackle violent Islam, but what? The discussions will continue.

 

[oggbashan]

1998? WTF, it is as if the British cling to their tradition of fucking the lower class while wanting the Royals to be... well Royal.

Human Rights in the UK are a matter of legislation and case law. When the UK law was passed in 1998 the then government didn't expect a whole series of decisions by the European Court of Human Rights that overruled UK law.

ECHR decisions have distorted human rights so much that criminals have far more rights than their victims.

What the new Government proposes is to rebalance the 'rights' towards normal people and reduce the 'rights' of criminals to resist justice.