4 ms·

I'm a native Brit and whilst I agree our national lack of care about freedom is concerning I think it's slightly more nuanced than that. My view is that people

I'm a native Brit and whilst I agree our national lack of care about freedom is concerning I think it's slightly more nuanced than that. My view is that people here are far too trusting of those in authority, and in particular counter-terrorist police and security services personnel. The attitude seems to be "if they think they need this then they know best". The collective psyche seems to take more comfort in the moral character of the people given the powers than in the safeguards against misuse. On the positive side, almost noone I know thinks that it's appropriate that local councils or the Food Standards Agency have these powers. Those parts of government are largely viewed as "nannying busybodies" and the "nannying" bits of government are mostly distrusted - there does remain a British sense of freedom. What's worrying though is that people don't seem to believe that minor agencies actually have been given these powers. When I've had conversations with people about this the reaction is "you're just exaggerating to make a point" or "they won't really do that, you're just concocting a far-fetched scenario that's technically legal but wouldn't happen in practice".

hlandau 7y ago
I distinctly recall cases decades ago (but after the passage of RIPA 2000) of councils trying to use investigatory powers on things like, (I think I'm remembering this right) parents suspected of applying for schools outside their catchment area by lying about where they live. The hard examples of incredibly petty abuse by local councils, which actually happened, are out there if you want to go looking for them.
- tomatocracy 7y ago
  Yes. Some councils paid private investigators to follow and photograph families to try to "prove" that they weren't really living in the catchment areas for certain schools but had just rented properties as a postbox address. So not electronic surveillance as such but powers that they were indeed using under RIPA 2000. I've tried pointing that out to people in the past (when the post Snowden legislation was being scrutinized by Parliament to try to encourage people to write to their MPs about it) and the reaction tended to be "see, they got caught and hardly any of them were doing it anyway so it proves that the system works". It's depressing.
BiteCode_dev 7y ago
> My view is that people here are far too trusting of those in authority, and in particular counter-terrorist police and security services personnel. I always though "brainwashed by TV" was an exaggeration. But the more I discuss with people, the more I realize they think the police/hospital/army/court works like on TV. E.G: they expect that if there is a murder, an NCIS like team with try to find the murderer, or if they get strange like disease, some Dr House will be assigned to find the solution, or that judge are impartial and mayors are competent to deal with the solutions their city require. The reality is that people are average human being with limited resources everywhere. They are lazy, have ego, have a small budget, are tired, have an agenda, have bosses and politics, etc. "authority, and in particular counter-terrorist police and security services personnel" is no different.
PoachedSausage 7y ago
Also a Brit and I share the view that people are too trusting of authority. I also tend toward a distrust of authority. However, to play devils advocate, I sometimes wonder if we are collectively too immature to not need some "nannying". It wasn't long ago that food standards were compromised[0]. We also have problems with fly-tipping and dog fouling, both require a certain level of "nannying" to deal with. I just wish we could deal with such things without resorting to authority. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal
- CodeGlitch 7y ago
  In the UK we have a low level of public sector corruption (or perceived corruption) [1] so I think populous has grown to trust the state to a degree. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
- jjoonathan 7y ago
  > I sometimes wonder if we are collectively too immature to not need some "nannying" The argument against government isn't that we have our shit together and don't need supervision, it's that the government doesn't have its shit together and is unfit to supervise, or that it will rapidly become unfit once a position of power is created and inevitably attracts those most interested in exploiting it. Everything you've posted supports the latter argument: the Food Standards Agency wants in on the dragnet surveillance apparatus, which is not their job, while they can't even ensure basic traceability (as evidenced by your link), which is their job? Not only are they unfit to be a "nanny," they sound like outright crooks!
CodeGlitch 7y ago
Another Brit here: I'm not aware of anyone in my circle seeing such agencies as being "nannying". I'm of the opinion that the Food Standards Agency improves life for everyone in the UK. I would rather put up with a little bit of nannying if it means I don't get food poisoning from restaurants. I used to be all for freedom of speech and anti-censorship, but these days I've seen too many friends and family fall for miss-information. My university-educated brother-in-law believes in all the "5G causes COVID-19" nonsense. He even sent me a video on YouTube from a "Top American Doctor". Sigh. ps. I think the solution here is to teach more critical thinking in schools.
- confounded 7y ago
  > I'm not aware of anyone in my circle seeing such agencies as being "nannying". I'm of the opinion that the Food Standards Agency improves life for everyone in the UK. I would rather put up with a little bit of nannying if it means I don't get food poisoning from restaurants. Is food poisoning from restaurants currently a problem for you? How will mass surveillance help? > I used to be all for freedom of speech and anti-censorship, but these days I've seen too many friends and family fall for miss-information. My university-educated brother-in-law believes in all the "5G causes COVID-19" nonsense. He even sent me a video on YouTube from a "Top American Doctor". Sigh. What are you suggesting the state should do to/for your friends and family who’s opinions you dislike? Do their views mean that they are undeserving of human rights?
  - CodeGlitch 7y ago
    > Is food poisoning from restaurants currently a problem for you? How will mass surveillance help? Yes it is - if health & safety and food quality are not set to a high standard (this applies to everyone BTW). Organized criminals will break all sorts of rules to make a quick buck - including selling horse meat as beef. How do you suggest the Food Standards Agency tackle this problem in the absence of a functional police force? > What are you suggesting the state should do to/for your friends and family who’s opinions you dislike? > Do their views mean that they are undeserving of human rights? I have little patients for people who ignore basic scientific facts and believe the utter nonsense of so-called conspiracy theorists. It's their choice to ignore reality, and bring it on themselves to loose human rights.

hlandau 7y ago

I distinctly recall cases decades ago (but after the passage of RIPA 2000) of councils trying to use investigatory powers on things like, (I think I'm remembering this right) parents suspected of applying for schools outside their catchment area by lying about where they live. The hard examples of incredibly petty abuse by local councils, which actually happened, are out there if you want to go looking for them.

tomatocracy 7y ago
Yes. Some councils paid private investigators to follow and photograph families to try to "prove" that they weren't really living in the catchment areas for certain schools but had just rented properties as a postbox address. So not electronic surveillance as such but powers that they were indeed using under RIPA 2000. I've tried pointing that out to people in the past (when the post Snowden legislation was being scrutinized by Parliament to try to encourage people to write to their MPs about it) and the reaction tended to be "see, they got caught and hardly any of them were doing it anyway so it proves that the system works". It's depressing.

BiteCode_dev 7y ago

> My view is that people here are far too trusting of those in authority, and in particular counter-terrorist police and security services personnel. I always though "brainwashed by TV" was an exaggeration. But the more I discuss with people, the more I realize they think the police/hospital/army/court works like on TV. E.G: they expect that if there is a murder, an NCIS like team with try to find the murderer, or if they get strange like disease, some Dr House will be assigned to find the solution, or that judge are impartial and mayors are competent to deal with the solutions their city require. The reality is that people are average human being with limited resources everywhere. They are lazy, have ego, have a small budget, are tired, have an agenda, have bosses and politics, etc. "authority, and in particular counter-terrorist police and security services personnel" is no different.

PoachedSausage 7y ago

Also a Brit and I share the view that people are too trusting of authority. I also tend toward a distrust of authority. However, to play devils advocate, I sometimes wonder if we are collectively too immature to not need some "nannying". It wasn't long ago that food standards were compromised[0]. We also have problems with fly-tipping and dog fouling, both require a certain level of "nannying" to deal with. I just wish we could deal with such things without resorting to authority. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal

CodeGlitch 7y ago
In the UK we have a low level of public sector corruption (or perceived corruption) [1] so I think populous has grown to trust the state to a degree. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
jjoonathan 7y ago
> I sometimes wonder if we are collectively too immature to not need some "nannying" The argument against government isn't that we have our shit together and don't need supervision, it's that the government doesn't have its shit together and is unfit to supervise, or that it will rapidly become unfit once a position of power is created and inevitably attracts those most interested in exploiting it. Everything you've posted supports the latter argument: the Food Standards Agency wants in on the dragnet surveillance apparatus, which is not their job, while they can't even ensure basic traceability (as evidenced by your link), which is their job? Not only are they unfit to be a "nanny," they sound like outright crooks!

CodeGlitch 7y ago

Another Brit here: I'm not aware of anyone in my circle seeing such agencies as being "nannying". I'm of the opinion that the Food Standards Agency improves life for everyone in the UK. I would rather put up with a little bit of nannying if it means I don't get food poisoning from restaurants. I used to be all for freedom of speech and anti-censorship, but these days I've seen too many friends and family fall for miss-information. My university-educated brother-in-law believes in all the "5G causes COVID-19" nonsense. He even sent me a video on YouTube from a "Top American Doctor". Sigh. ps. I think the solution here is to teach more critical thinking in schools.

confounded 7y ago
> I'm not aware of anyone in my circle seeing such agencies as being "nannying". I'm of the opinion that the Food Standards Agency improves life for everyone in the UK. I would rather put up with a little bit of nannying if it means I don't get food poisoning from restaurants. Is food poisoning from restaurants currently a problem for you? How will mass surveillance help? > I used to be all for freedom of speech and anti-censorship, but these days I've seen too many friends and family fall for miss-information. My university-educated brother-in-law believes in all the "5G causes COVID-19" nonsense. He even sent me a video on YouTube from a "Top American Doctor". Sigh. What are you suggesting the state should do to/for your friends and family who’s opinions you dislike? Do their views mean that they are undeserving of human rights?
- CodeGlitch 7y ago
  > Is food poisoning from restaurants currently a problem for you? How will mass surveillance help? Yes it is - if health & safety and food quality are not set to a high standard (this applies to everyone BTW). Organized criminals will break all sorts of rules to make a quick buck - including selling horse meat as beef. How do you suggest the Food Standards Agency tackle this problem in the absence of a functional police force? > What are you suggesting the state should do to/for your friends and family who’s opinions you dislike? > Do their views mean that they are undeserving of human rights? I have little patients for people who ignore basic scientific facts and believe the utter nonsense of so-called conspiracy theorists. It's their choice to ignore reality, and bring it on themselves to loose human rights.