Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 08, 2016, 03:47:28 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: putting politics before lives ...  (Read 1111 times)

joiwind

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 484
  • carpe momentum
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
putting politics before lives ...
« on: December 03, 2012, 07:35:28 AM »
UK Home Secretary Theresa May has warned that those opposing plans to let police monitor all internet use are "putting politics before people's lives".

The draft Communications Data Bill would mean internet providers having to retain records of all their customers' online activity for 12 months.

Mrs May told The Sun the powers would help police tackle serious organised crime, paedophiles, and terrorists.

Source


- Does anyone see anything odd in that extract ? I do, do you ?

.: I use K-Meleon - the browser you can control - but I love Pale Moon too :.

eleman

  • Spam Killer
  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2009
  • **
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 393
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: putting politics before lives ...
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2012, 07:46:19 AM »
Well, here's is how I see the picture:

West is a hegemon in decline, and it knows it is in decline. To keep the hold on the world politics just a tad longer in the face of BRICS and such, Western governments seek initiatives to grant them stricter control over any discourse, and the ability to make people disappear under the label of terrorists, if they happen to criticize too much.

In a similar vein, to keep the hold on the world economics just a tad longer in the face of BRICS and such, Western governments reinforce intellectual property regimes, so that they can buy anything when they still have the riches collected over colony empires and printing 100 dollar banknotes. When those riches wither away (and they will, because Chinese are producing, and Americans are not), they will still earn some money through the monopolies imposed over pharmaceuticals, rectangles and such.

Yeah, I know, it's a far-fetched, hard to prove claim. And yes, you're free to call it a conspiracy theory.

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,329
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: putting politics before lives ...
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2012, 07:57:58 AM »
- Does anyone see anything odd in that extract ?

I dont see anything odd in it -
just the commonly used emotional blackmail approach to why-you-should-support-this.

I wouldnt mind, it almost sounds reasonable to me - they just want to see who you emailed, not what (content) you emailed. But when they start off with the emotional blackmail, alarm bells go off.
Tom

joiwind

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 484
  • carpe momentum
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: putting politics before lives ...
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2012, 08:22:05 AM »
I agree with both of you but what I found odd - and amusing - is this : "Mrs May told The Sun ...".
Now in case you don't know it The Sun is a tabloid paper belonging to News International who were recently, and still are, accused of phone-tapping, hacking and so on (and worse)  in the UK.
Perhaps they are experts ?
.: I use K-Meleon - the browser you can control - but I love Pale Moon too :.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: putting politics before lives ...
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2012, 08:23:29 AM »
Yeah, I know, it's a far-fetched, hard to prove claim. And yes, you're free to call it a conspiracy theory.

I don't see it as either far fetched nor a conspiracy. I just see it as typical human behavior.

Those with an advantage wish to preserve their advantage.

Those in possession of something of value generally try to hold on to it - and ideally get more of it.

Humans generally prefer to associate with people that think and look much like themselves.

Humans generally prefer to do nice things for the people they like. And ignore, or do bad things, to those they don't.

The instinctive human responses to any threat are: Fight/Flight/Freeze.

Cooperation is not instinctive. Nor is morality. They are both learned behaviors subject to the interpretations of the community and the environment one grows up in.

So no need for fancy conspiracy theories. The West has it pretty good right now. Arguably better on the whole than any other society in human history all things being equal. And the West simply wants to keep it that way.

The problem lies in what may be considered an acceptable way to keep it so.

People have preferred approaches to problems based on previous experiences and successes. And they tend to repeat behaviors that have worked in the past - even when current realities indicate the old approaches are no longer workable.

People that are used to thinking in terms of police power and military responses tend to see people wearing uniforms and carrying guns as the optimal solution to otherwise insurmountable problems.

It's not always.

But try convincing somebody who believes in guns, and prisons, and all the other trappings of government coercion otherwise. Like Louis XIV so famously engraved on the barrels of his canons: Ultima Ratio Regum

Believe it. :-\

Renegade

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,220
  • Tell me something you don't know...
    • View Profile
    • Renegade Minds
    • Donate to Member
Re: putting politics before lives ...
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2012, 02:35:12 AM »
Yeah, I know, it's a far-fetched, hard to prove claim. And yes, you're free to call it a conspiracy theory.

If anything, you didn't go far enough down that road. ;)

I wouldnt mind, it almost sounds reasonable to me - they just want to see who you emailed, not what (content) you emailed.

And therein lies the problem... Today they want to let the police know WHO. Tomorrow, it's every agency. The next day, they demand that they know WHAT was said. The next day, the prisons are full. The day after that, they solve the prison overcrowding problem with rifles and mass graves.

Today they want an inch. Tomorrow they will TAKE a mile.
Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker