6 ms·

I live in the UK and the thing that's disturbed me most about all this is how little coverage there's been and how little outrage there is about the consequence

by boyce 10y ago

I live in the UK and the thing that's disturbed me most about all this is how little coverage there's been and how little outrage there is about the consequences of this law. I genuinely think as a country we've given up. There's no enthusiasm for any cause and no one has any will left to stand up for the things they ought to care about. It's a weird atmosphere here now.

Luc 10y ago
> I genuinely think as a country we've given up. Coincidentally, 'the percentage of people who say it is “essential” to live in a democracy has plummeted, and it is especially low among younger generations.' http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/americas/western-liberal-democracy.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/americas/western-lib... Seems to be happening worldwide, to some degree.
mtgx 10y ago
That's why people don't trust the mainstream media anymore. They've become to close to power, and they only report on things that they know aren't offensive to those on power. So they avoid talking about protests or power-grabbing laws.
FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
All the attention being put on Brexit provided the perfect cover for this, similar to the crap stuffed into the unPatriotic Act
doc_holliday 10y ago
Yes, the lack of outrage is worrying to say the least. What I find very disturbing is the response I've got from some people in regards to signing the petition against the legislation. "I don't want to sign that, I will probably end up on some watchlist". This is incredible, to admit this you are basically admitting that we no longer live in a free democracy. If you cannot sign a petition regarding basic civil liberties without ending up on a watchlist then you do not live in a free democracy. Upon me telling them this, I am usually then greeted with a shrug.
- worutuwoeriuo 10y ago
  that's because it's meaningless. they're doing all this and more already and this is just to make it official. signing a petition wont change a single thing. you can safely assume that legal or not all your traffic is monitored and stored forever and that's not going to change ever.
- cantagi 10y ago
  Good point. Whenever I post about the snoopers charter, I even have friends jumping in arguing that it's a good idea and that it's necessary in order to protect us from terrorists and pedophiles. As hypocritical and intellectually lazy as it sounds, I delete their comments.
  - iamben 10y ago
    If your friends are reasonably bright/open to discussion, but are making the "I have nothing to hide, so why should I worry" argument, and their genuine fear is terrorists blowing up their kids - I've had a little success with the "You might not have anything to hide, but others may." Then remind them that some people may be hiding things for good reason (fear of ostracisation/violence/death) as a result of social or religious reasons, and that if a list like this become public it could seriously affect _other people's_ lives, has sometimes made people take note. Obviously you have to choose your argument carefully.
    - artofcode 10y ago
      In The Netherlands nobody had anything to hide, like the Jews around WW2. It was all neatly recorded who was a Jew and made things a whole lot easier for the Germans once they got their hands on the records after they invaded. People might not have anything to hide now, but things can change... fast.
      - iamben 10y ago
        Yeah. My point exactly.
  - 10y ago
Nux 10y ago
I also live in the UK and I concur; complete apathy.
- DonaldFisk 10y ago
  What can people do about it? Go on a huge demonstration (like this one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2765041.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2765041.stm) and be ignored. Sign a petition (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38130344 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38130344) and be ignored. Write to your MP and be ignored. Refuse to implement it and be sacked.
  - baybal2 10y ago
    Organise an army, go to Westminster, kill your enemies, done. This is a proven, working way.
EasyTiger_ 10y ago
Can't say I've seen much on the BBC about such a big story - they seem to be doing their bit to keep the fuss minimal from the herd.
- rwmj 10y ago
  While it's not been headline news, they did have this very good article yesterday: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38134560 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38134560
JulianMorrison 10y ago
I have a feeling that UK people have decided not to care about hypotheticals, and that includes laws that technically exist but aren't inconveniencing them right now. People basically assume that the law lets the government do as it damn well pleases, or lets it off for doing so with a totally ineffectual slap on the wrist. Therefore the content of the law is irrelevant. If the government uses the law to do bad things, people might start to raise a ruckus.
- mercer 10y ago
  > If the government uses the law to do bad things, people might start to raise a ruckus. Perhaps it even needs to be 'do bad things to them' before ruckus-raising ensues.
- brokenmachine 10y ago
  The problem is when the laws inevitably start including clauses that make it illegal to talk about the bad things that are done. Because... terrorism?
stupidcar 10y ago
What frighten me most is that Labour, supposedly the official opposition to the government, refused to try to stop or improve this bill. Instead they waved it through, abstaining on key votes, and not bothering to table amendments. All of this is despite Labour being run by figures who have a long history of opposing government authoritarianism. For example, Jeremy Corbyn didn't vote against it. Shami Chakrabarti, who spent years running Liberty, an organisation dedicated to protecting individual liberties, abstained. What the hell is going on behind the scenes when people like that have been successfully silenced? When a law this far-reaching and repressive is passed with a conspiracy of silence and acquiescence from both the media and the political establishment, you have to conclude that UK democracy is basically non-functional. It's over.
- boyce 10y ago
  I didn't know Shami Chakrabarti abstained. That's totally mad. If there's one thing I would have thought we could rely on her for it was to vote against things like this. The Labour party have been completely neutered. The membership and the unions clearly want them to take a much more radical left wing approach but the party establishment still want them to be the party Blair built and it's caused this weird stalemate. I think Blair would have backed this bill. An interesting point is that the bill has exceptions for journalists. I suspect that has encouraged the media to keep pretty quiet about it.
  - crdoconnor 10y ago
    What's weird is that she (and Corbyn) were vehemently against it for a while and then suddenly she went quiet and abstained.
  - Pete_D 10y ago
    I think Blair almost certainly would have backed this. The other day I rediscovered this article from 2008 about councils using RIPA to catch people littering and flytipping: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3333366/Half-of-councils-use-anti-terror-laws-to-spy-on-bin-crimes.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3333366/Half-of-counc... > The Tories condemned the latest figures as further evidence that the law had become a "snooper's charter". "Under Labour, the rights and liberties of law-abiding citizens are being eroded through plans for ID cards, sinister microchip spies in bins and abuse of anti-terror laws by councils," said Eric Pickles, the party's communities spokesman. Strange reading nowadays. I wonder what Eric Pickles makes of it all.
martin-adams 10y ago
As a fellow Brit, I agree and it also feels like the timing of this was conveniently done while Brexit was going on and the US election. I think we're all fatigued right now which isn't fair.
gambiting 10y ago
I've posted this on my facebook and I immediately got 3 people telling me that they don't have anything to hide and I'm being paranoid. They are all British. I really think that UK suffers because it hasn't gone through a restrictive communist government that had extended surveillance and censorship - so that now, in 2016, people don't know how to recognize signs of what's coming.
- hellweaver666 10y ago
  I had that exact conversation with my wife yesterday. It's infuriating. Luckily, I live outside the UK and have done for nearly 5 years now. I don't see me returning for any length of time.
- drcongo 10y ago
  I always find it kind of ironic when things like this get shared on Facebook. If you don't want the UK government to know everything about you, why would you be happy for a private, tax-dodging corporation to?
  - robjan 10y ago
    If everyone uses Facebook to consume their news then what better way is there to spread information?
- DonaldFisk 10y ago
  Airstrip One? If they think they have nothing to hide, you could ask them whether they'd be happy with a telescreen in every room of their house or flat.
ddmf 10y ago
There has been more outrage about animal product (tallow) used in the new £5 notes...
DonaldFisk 10y ago
Hypernormalization? Living in an Unreal World: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtjfoEvsR9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtjfoEvsR9w Or are we at stage three of Dmitri Orlov's Five Stages of Collapse (http://cleaves.zapto.org/news/attachments/nov2009/5stagescollapseorlov.pdf http://cleaves.zapto.org/news/attachments/nov2009/5stagescol...)? Stage 3: Political collapse. Faith that "the government will take care of you" is lost. As official attempts to mitigate widespread loss of access to commercial sources of survival necessities fail to make a difference, the political establishment loses legitimacy and relevance.
a_imho 10y ago
Imo people need to attack the hard problem of changing the political landscape, limiting the power of the government and making it accountable. Fighting each and every overreach is way harder than limiting them in the first place. It is completely logical that the government is grabbing for more power as long as it is not incentivized to actually serve the people.

by boyce 10y ago

Luc 10y ago

> I genuinely think as a country we've given up. Coincidentally, 'the percentage of people who say it is “essential” to live in a democracy has plummeted, and it is especially low among younger generations.' http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/americas/western-liberal-democracy.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/americas/western-lib... Seems to be happening worldwide, to some degree.

mtgx 10y ago

That's why people don't trust the mainstream media anymore. They've become to close to power, and they only report on things that they know aren't offensive to those on power. So they avoid talking about protests or power-grabbing laws.

FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago

All the attention being put on Brexit provided the perfect cover for this, similar to the crap stuffed into the unPatriotic Act

doc_holliday 10y ago

Yes, the lack of outrage is worrying to say the least. What I find very disturbing is the response I've got from some people in regards to signing the petition against the legislation. "I don't want to sign that, I will probably end up on some watchlist". This is incredible, to admit this you are basically admitting that we no longer live in a free democracy. If you cannot sign a petition regarding basic civil liberties without ending up on a watchlist then you do not live in a free democracy. Upon me telling them this, I am usually then greeted with a shrug.

worutuwoeriuo 10y ago
that's because it's meaningless. they're doing all this and more already and this is just to make it official. signing a petition wont change a single thing. you can safely assume that legal or not all your traffic is monitored and stored forever and that's not going to change ever.
cantagi 10y ago
Good point. Whenever I post about the snoopers charter, I even have friends jumping in arguing that it's a good idea and that it's necessary in order to protect us from terrorists and pedophiles. As hypocritical and intellectually lazy as it sounds, I delete their comments.
- iamben 10y ago
  If your friends are reasonably bright/open to discussion, but are making the "I have nothing to hide, so why should I worry" argument, and their genuine fear is terrorists blowing up their kids - I've had a little success with the "You might not have anything to hide, but others may." Then remind them that some people may be hiding things for good reason (fear of ostracisation/violence/death) as a result of social or religious reasons, and that if a list like this become public it could seriously affect _other people's_ lives, has sometimes made people take note. Obviously you have to choose your argument carefully.
  - artofcode 10y ago
    In The Netherlands nobody had anything to hide, like the Jews around WW2. It was all neatly recorded who was a Jew and made things a whole lot easier for the Germans once they got their hands on the records after they invaded. People might not have anything to hide now, but things can change... fast.
    - iamben 10y ago
      Yeah. My point exactly.
- 10y ago

Nux 10y ago

I also live in the UK and I concur; complete apathy.

DonaldFisk 10y ago
What can people do about it? Go on a huge demonstration (like this one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2765041.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2765041.stm) and be ignored. Sign a petition (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38130344 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38130344) and be ignored. Write to your MP and be ignored. Refuse to implement it and be sacked.
- baybal2 10y ago
  Organise an army, go to Westminster, kill your enemies, done. This is a proven, working way.

EasyTiger_ 10y ago

Can't say I've seen much on the BBC about such a big story - they seem to be doing their bit to keep the fuss minimal from the herd.

rwmj 10y ago
While it's not been headline news, they did have this very good article yesterday: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38134560 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38134560

JulianMorrison 10y ago

I have a feeling that UK people have decided not to care about hypotheticals, and that includes laws that technically exist but aren't inconveniencing them right now. People basically assume that the law lets the government do as it damn well pleases, or lets it off for doing so with a totally ineffectual slap on the wrist. Therefore the content of the law is irrelevant. If the government uses the law to do bad things, people might start to raise a ruckus.

mercer 10y ago
> If the government uses the law to do bad things, people might start to raise a ruckus. Perhaps it even needs to be 'do bad things to them' before ruckus-raising ensues.
brokenmachine 10y ago
The problem is when the laws inevitably start including clauses that make it illegal to talk about the bad things that are done. Because... terrorism?

stupidcar 10y ago

What frighten me most is that Labour, supposedly the official opposition to the government, refused to try to stop or improve this bill. Instead they waved it through, abstaining on key votes, and not bothering to table amendments. All of this is despite Labour being run by figures who have a long history of opposing government authoritarianism. For example, Jeremy Corbyn didn't vote against it. Shami Chakrabarti, who spent years running Liberty, an organisation dedicated to protecting individual liberties, abstained. What the hell is going on behind the scenes when people like that have been successfully silenced? When a law this far-reaching and repressive is passed with a conspiracy of silence and acquiescence from both the media and the political establishment, you have to conclude that UK democracy is basically non-functional. It's over.

boyce 10y ago
I didn't know Shami Chakrabarti abstained. That's totally mad. If there's one thing I would have thought we could rely on her for it was to vote against things like this. The Labour party have been completely neutered. The membership and the unions clearly want them to take a much more radical left wing approach but the party establishment still want them to be the party Blair built and it's caused this weird stalemate. I think Blair would have backed this bill. An interesting point is that the bill has exceptions for journalists. I suspect that has encouraged the media to keep pretty quiet about it.
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  What's weird is that she (and Corbyn) were vehemently against it for a while and then suddenly she went quiet and abstained.
- Pete_D 10y ago
  I think Blair almost certainly would have backed this. The other day I rediscovered this article from 2008 about councils using RIPA to catch people littering and flytipping: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3333366/Half-of-councils-use-anti-terror-laws-to-spy-on-bin-crimes.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3333366/Half-of-counc... > The Tories condemned the latest figures as further evidence that the law had become a "snooper's charter". "Under Labour, the rights and liberties of law-abiding citizens are being eroded through plans for ID cards, sinister microchip spies in bins and abuse of anti-terror laws by councils," said Eric Pickles, the party's communities spokesman. Strange reading nowadays. I wonder what Eric Pickles makes of it all.

martin-adams 10y ago

As a fellow Brit, I agree and it also feels like the timing of this was conveniently done while Brexit was going on and the US election. I think we're all fatigued right now which isn't fair.

gambiting 10y ago

I've posted this on my facebook and I immediately got 3 people telling me that they don't have anything to hide and I'm being paranoid. They are all British. I really think that UK suffers because it hasn't gone through a restrictive communist government that had extended surveillance and censorship - so that now, in 2016, people don't know how to recognize signs of what's coming.

hellweaver666 10y ago
I had that exact conversation with my wife yesterday. It's infuriating. Luckily, I live outside the UK and have done for nearly 5 years now. I don't see me returning for any length of time.
drcongo 10y ago
I always find it kind of ironic when things like this get shared on Facebook. If you don't want the UK government to know everything about you, why would you be happy for a private, tax-dodging corporation to?
- robjan 10y ago
  If everyone uses Facebook to consume their news then what better way is there to spread information?
DonaldFisk 10y ago
Airstrip One? If they think they have nothing to hide, you could ask them whether they'd be happy with a telescreen in every room of their house or flat.

ddmf 10y ago

There has been more outrage about animal product (tallow) used in the new £5 notes...

DonaldFisk 10y ago

Hypernormalization? Living in an Unreal World: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtjfoEvsR9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtjfoEvsR9w Or are we at stage three of Dmitri Orlov's Five Stages of Collapse (http://cleaves.zapto.org/news/attachments/nov2009/5stagescollapseorlov.pdf http://cleaves.zapto.org/news/attachments/nov2009/5stagescol...)? Stage 3: Political collapse. Faith that "the government will take care of you" is lost. As official attempts to mitigate widespread loss of access to commercial sources of survival necessities fail to make a difference, the political establishment loses legitimacy and relevance.

a_imho 10y ago

Imo people need to attack the hard problem of changing the political landscape, limiting the power of the government and making it accountable. Fighting each and every overreach is way harder than limiting them in the first place. It is completely logical that the government is grabbing for more power as long as it is not incentivized to actually serve the people.