Comment by Funes-
15 days ago
Further proof against the idea that we live in "democracies", if anyone still believes that. We're at the hands of petty tyrants. Modern societies are surveillance hellholes, and it seems to only get worse and worse. So much for "progress".
I think Technofeudalism, as Yanis Varoufakis put it, creates inverted totalitarianism where people are controlled not directly by government with guns but with corporations with access control and moderation power over apps that form the majority of the public commons, personal, and work lives. To resist this subjugation, individuals, municipalities, and groups, large and small, need to build their castles on the bedrock of non-profit co-op services in countries with strong privacy safeguards rather than on the uncertain sands of corporate shores where they will be swept away by the next wave. It's expensive, it's starting from scratch it many cases, and not going to be as immediately polished as corporate offerings, but the socioeconomic and human capital won't be as easily destroyed, manipulated, or raided by police or corporate whims.
I think this is unnecessarily defeatist. The UK is still a well functioning democracy. Using scare quotes around proper democracy just blurs the line to authoritarians and dictators.
We elect our politicians. We demand they stop serious crime and terrorism. When they have bad ideas about how to do that, we let them know that it's a bad idea. Or we don't elect them again. This works.
"We elect our politicians. …When they have bad ideas about how to do that, we let them know that it's a bad idea. Or we don't elect them again. This works."
Think so? Perhaps on the surface. Think Yes Minister and Sir Humphrey. No matter how well meaning politicians are they'll be screwed rotten by determined public sector employees and then they'll be finished off by powerful corporate interests, citizens haven't a chance.
What's more you the citizen will likely be the last to know about it. Yes, outwardly all will seem normal as that's the plan but it's only a chimera—appearance is everything. Those in control learned that trick from Vespasian, it has a long lineage of working well.
Can't you see the Investigatory Powers Act wasn't dreamt up by politicans but by nameless but very powerful gnomes in GCHQ, MI6, etc., etc? For starters, politicians wouldn't have had the brains to concoct an Orwellian act on a scale like that on their own. (I've spent too long working in government bureaucracies to know how it works.)
Tragically, democracy, these days, is essentially dead. On the surface it appears alive and functioning and the citizenry still thinks it has say, but in reality it's actually like a cockroach that's been parsitized by a wasp—it's 'alive' in appearance only.
And yet you have a lengthy accumulation of the aforementioned bad ideas.
Perhaps because in your FPTP electoral system, you have few avenues to actually "let them know that it's a bad idea". I mean, supposing you don't like this particular law - which party would you vote for to send the signal?
"This works" in a parallel universe.
People vote like their dad or what the paper (Murdoch) tells them. If you are lucky to have a thinking voter they only get to choose 1 or 2 issues. Maybe they want lower income tax more than something something privacy.
People won't vote against their interests? "Latinos for Trump" etc. Says otherwise. Brexit people getting kicked out of Spain etc.
[dead]
Thats nothing yet, just wait until we have no reals cash, just electronic money. This will be fun NOT
No cash... now that will cause a riot. Why? Tax evaders won't like it.
No, in most countrys you have no right for a bank accouny. So when you do something the bank does not like, you will fall complete out of the system. You cannot go to work, you cannot buy anything.
1 reply →
I think you'll find that the majority of UK's citizens believe its government should be able to access data with a warrant. Whether the dēmos agree with your particular values is another matter, but this is not obviously undemocratic, unlike royal assent.
Certainly this decision seems intended to defend the state more than the people.