David Cameron announces a new age of intolerance


#1

[Permalink]


#2

Having failed to lose the election, Cameron tries his damnedest to get kicked out.


#3

It’s worked before


#4

That book Orwell wrote… it was not intended as a model of good governance.


#5

Are these laws targeted at Muslims? Or does the UK have other elements it wants to silence, as well?

I mean, obviously these powers will quickly be used to target all kinds of people. That’s how government powers work. But are Muslims the initial, primary target?


#6

Funnily enough, when they were in opposition, the Tories were all about freedom of speech and civil liberties.

A few statements from the Conservative’s 2010 manifesto:

Restore our civil liberties

Labour have subjected Britain’s historic freedoms to unprecedented attack. They have trampled on liberties…

To protect our freedoms from state encroachment and encourage greater social responsibility…We will review and reform libel laws to protect freedom of speech

We will take further steps to protect people from unwarranted intrusion by the state, including curtailing the surveillance laws that allow some councils to use anti-terrorism laws to spy on people.


#7

I wonder when they’ll get around to banning the letter Z…


#8

I eagerly await news of the first (and second, and third, and Nth) attempt to obtain an order barring Cameron’s party as one of those “extremist organisations which seek to undermine democracy” using the law itself as an example of a way it seeks to undermine democracy.


#9

Fascism. Poor Britain.


#10

“…but it will fall short of banning on the grounds of provoking hatred.”

This prevents the bill from banning itself.


#11

(my emph)

Ah, well, there you are you see ,


#12

According to the article, the Green Party has already been targeted, it seems.


#13

Ah, but Cameron has explained he needs censorship to defend British values such as free speech. So if you oppose his censorship, you obviously oppose free speech.

So perhaps we could solve global warming by using Orwell’s spinning body as an alternative power source…


#14

They have one shot before it all comes crashing back to normalcy, meaning they have to break out the rediculous and the stupid just in case it actually works and people tolerate it, b/c, you know, it’s what the owners want.


#15

I have an academic paper I would like to get published. What the address of this police organization that’s supposed to vet the publications of ‘extremists’? I would love to give them the opportunity to read my work.


#16


#17

Britain is in a tough spot. It’s disgraceful what has happened there, tragic really.
Radical Imams finding sanctuary… Funny how they enjoy all of the benefits of living in the west and simultaneously declare war on it. Scream about jihad all day, then go home to your nice flat and have some tea cakes with your Mum.
A bit of fascism would help Britain…an unpopular position, I’m sure.


Should we make flags more visible?
#18

You got that right, Oswald.


#19

The silliness of Britain’s not-really-a-constitution and the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty means that any and all laws passed by Parliament are valid. If Parliament passes a law that says blue-eyed babies should be shot at dawn, that’s valid law.

In any decently written Constitution, you’d have

  1. A difference between an ordinary bill and a Constitutional Amendment, with the amendment being much more difficult to pass
  2. A Supreme Court with the mandate to review laws and rule on their constitutionality.

And, if you’re in India, you can use the Basic Structure doctrine to argue that even an amendment that changes the structure of the constitution (as opposed to making small changes) is beyond the power of the Legislature.

But Britain doesn’t, so this would actually be legal… So much for Churchill’s Great Democracy!


#21

Oh, well played, daneel…