Using terrorist attacks to curb civil liberties and extend government control of the web is a favorite tactic of globalist politicians. Before Theresa May there was Tony Blair, whose Labour government introduced 90-day pre-trial detentions and gave security agencies the power to monitor private internet communications and hack into smartphones. Even before 9/11 and the War on Terror, Blair’s government wanted to give more powers to the police to snoop on private data.
There are powerful agendas behind the seemingly neverending push for government oversight of the net – not least the global corporations that pushed for SOPA & PIPA in 2012 before massive public outrage caused a hasty retreat by mainstream politicians, who overwhelmingly supported it.
Populists of the left and right, previously considered “fringe candidates” and “crackpots” (until they started winning national elections and referenda), have always been more sceptical of attempts to seize power in cyberspace, whether they come from corporations or the state. In the U.S., libertarian right-wingers like Ron and Rand Paul as well as leftists like Dennis Kucinich consistently oppose government attempts to wrest control of the internet in the name of counter-terrorism.
Theresa May, more than any other British Prime Minister, is insistent that more internet regulation is the answer. Even before she became leader of the Conservative party, when she was Home Secretary in the Coalition Government of 2010-2015, she pushed relentlessly for a bill that became known as the “snooper’s charter,” which was only blocked due to opposition from the Conservatives’ coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats. As Prime Minister, it formed one of her first major pieces of legislation.
Had May not lost her Conservative majority in the House of Commons last week, she would have received a mandate to enact her vast internet regulation plan. The Conservative manifesto turned web tyranny into a boast, proclaiming the party’s intention to make Britain “the global leader in the regulation of the use of personal data and the internet.” Prime Minister May even refused to rule out Chinese-style censorship of the internet in Britain.
Story
There are powerful agendas behind the seemingly neverending push for government oversight of the net – not least the global corporations that pushed for SOPA & PIPA in 2012 before massive public outrage caused a hasty retreat by mainstream politicians, who overwhelmingly supported it.
Populists of the left and right, previously considered “fringe candidates” and “crackpots” (until they started winning national elections and referenda), have always been more sceptical of attempts to seize power in cyberspace, whether they come from corporations or the state. In the U.S., libertarian right-wingers like Ron and Rand Paul as well as leftists like Dennis Kucinich consistently oppose government attempts to wrest control of the internet in the name of counter-terrorism.
Theresa May, more than any other British Prime Minister, is insistent that more internet regulation is the answer. Even before she became leader of the Conservative party, when she was Home Secretary in the Coalition Government of 2010-2015, she pushed relentlessly for a bill that became known as the “snooper’s charter,” which was only blocked due to opposition from the Conservatives’ coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats. As Prime Minister, it formed one of her first major pieces of legislation.
Had May not lost her Conservative majority in the House of Commons last week, she would have received a mandate to enact her vast internet regulation plan. The Conservative manifesto turned web tyranny into a boast, proclaiming the party’s intention to make Britain “the global leader in the regulation of the use of personal data and the internet.” Prime Minister May even refused to rule out Chinese-style censorship of the internet in Britain.
Story
