User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Non Planetarion Discussions > General Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 11 Aug 2007, 12:27   #1
Hebdomad
I ♡ ☠
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 834
Hebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Get those terrorists!

I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but - bastards, utter bastards. I remember Blair's putrid statement "but the rules of the game have changed" and now they have indeed changed: the government can stomp on all dissidence, hinder social change. The representative institutions can now define acceptable dissidence through implicitly labeling unfavoured dissidents terrorists.

The writing was on the wall, but it annoys me how most people suffer from political myopia. It was the same with tuition fees: "but it's only 1,000 pounds" but now we're rolling down the slippery slop into the world of private finance after the government slipped in a precedent. But even if you do not agree with the above statement, this is far more worrying; the ambiguous label "terrorist" now implicitly defines anyone unhappy with state policy.

The article claims the police will only use the power if the protesters act illegally, which seems reasonable until you realise those householders who did not pay their poll tax acted illegally - lock them up for a month without trail why didn't we? Detention without charge? Welcome to the new "rules of the game".
Hebdomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11 Aug 2007, 12:32   #2
MrL_JaKiri
The Twilight of the Gods
 
MrL_JaKiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,481
MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.MrL_JaKiri has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Get those terrorists!

Much better than that other thread.

I don't think slippery slope arguments are particularly relevent; like your tuition fees argument, it's bad that it's happening at all, not bad because it might get worse in the future.

Blair has been deregulating (for want of a better term) stop and search powers for some time now, but for some reason it's slipped in under the radar of popular consciousness. The Guardian is especially bad for this - what it covers seems to be determined by events, not by changes in the laws that lead to events like the one mentioned above.
MrL_JaKiri is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11 Aug 2007, 12:56   #3
Hebdomad
I ♡ ☠
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 834
Hebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Get those terrorists!

Jakiri, where did you read about these changes?

I agree it's bad now, but it's likely to get worse, a far more worrying prospect which people tend not to see.

When the government enacted both policies I naturally spoke to my non-political friends about the laws. They perceived the laws as fully-grown and implemented entities instead of perceiving the likelihood of extensions, even those who disagreed with them.

Generally, after the public adjusts to laws - they may not like them but they accept they are there - then the government can extend laws that we have all agreed. And it's clear we have begrudgingly accepted the laws through our lack of french-style strikes and protests which send out a strong signal to government that they need to think again. It doesn't help that both parties tend not to differ that much on many of these issues, or that extensions normally come about in the same period of rule.

Because the government has set these precedents - through either the initial tuition fees legislation or terrorism law - the public feels less likely to protest about the extensions because the initial impact of the law has abated thanks to the previous accepted legislation that it build upon.

If that was the first way that the government can circumvent public opposition, the government now has the second: to detain dissidents. Besides, how can we protest about new policy now the government can threaten to detain protesters - would most people happily miss a month of work? Even if this is just a threat, it's a extremely good one.

Last edited by Hebdomad; 11 Aug 2007 at 13:08.
Hebdomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11 Aug 2007, 16:50   #4
All Systems Go
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 3,347
All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.All Systems Go has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Get those terrorists!

Rome wasn't built in a day and neither were these laws. It's Politics 101, you get as much as you can then go back again to get the rest. A slight erosion of freedom here, a curbing of rights there and before you know it they're all gone like a pork pie left with Pig*.

I don't really expect the press to report anything to be honest. If it doesn't come in a press release then it isn't news!

*it's death for no reason, and death for no reason is murder
__________________
The 20th century has been characterised by three developments of great political importance. The growth of democracy; the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.
All Systems Go is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11 Aug 2007, 20:02   #5
dda
USS Oklahoma
 
dda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,500
dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.dda has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Get those terrorists!

It seems to me that people protesting various things, whether the matter is good or bad which they are protesting, would do well to think about the tactics which they use for the protest. I am no talking about violent vs. non-violent as violent protest doesn't usually further the cause unless it turns in to a general rebellion. However, non-violent protests aimed at changing governmental policies which disrupt the activities of the citizenry, as opposed to disrupting the routine of the government, usually causes a backlash which actually harms the cause and allows the government to become more repressive in response, with the blessings of the populace.
__________________
Ignorance is curable, stupidity is not.
dda is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11 Aug 2007, 23:11   #6
Hebdomad
I ♡ ☠
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 834
Hebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Get those terrorists!

Illegal opposition to policy does not equal violence 100% of the time, as the poll tax example served to prove. Even violence was used there (youtube has a good example) yet they were normal householders. Concern about this law should not concentrate on these acts (although that servers as good redirection), but the power the government has to detain dissidents without charge for 30 days, and more to come I would guess.
Hebdomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12 Aug 2007, 11:57   #7
Dante Hicks
Clerk
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 13,940
Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Get those terrorists!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hebdomad
If that was the first way that the government can circumvent public opposition, the government now has the second: to detain dissidents. Besides, how can we protest about new policy now the government can threaten to detain protesters - would most people happily miss a month of work? Even if this is just a threat, it's a extremely good one.
I'm not sure it is a particularly good threat. Who is it frightening? Crusty anarchist types who don't have a job? Occupational hazard for them. Less crusty but still hardcore protestor types - like the sort who have broken into military bases in the past and done damage to planes? I imagine before doing that they accepted there was a (very slim) chance they could have been shot, so I suspect they wouldn't be swayed either.

As you imply, it's a threat against people with jobs, mortgages and other committments etc. But if it got to the stage where feeling on this issue was strong enough for people to contemplate real sustained protest and this was amongst "ordinary people" (e.g. middle class tax-payers) , then the policy would essentialy become useless - and I think people would realise this quite quickly. Most people might be cowards (I'm not sure, I know I am) but if they thought that at least a couple of their friends, or co-workers or neighbours would be in the same boat as their neighbours then I doubt - if they cared - this sort of threat would matter. Mainly because people would realise we don't have anywhere to put the real villains (whomever they are), so where are we going to put these thousands of martyrs?

On the train I get in the mornings, it's not usually very busy, but a given service is ever so slightly too busy to guarantee a seat. There is a first class section which is invariably empty. I often end up sitting there, not because I'm bravely fighting the power but because in the five years I've been commuting that way, I've never seen a ticket inspector at that time, and if I get a £1,000 fine then so be it (plus some internal rationalisation about given the high fares I pay and so on). Once I (or another passenger) have sat down you usually find at least three other people sitting down - their fears have been allayed somewhat by other people doing it. And once you have five or six people sitting there, well - while the maximum penalty hasn't changed at all, the perceived likelihood of receiving it seems to diminish. I'm not claiming to have studied this matter empirically, but I tend to find the people who sit down first are more likely to be young, a bit disshelved, males - often from an ethnic minority. The people who sit down afterwards look more stereotypically middle class, for what that's worth.

But anyway, the main barrier to protest is (and will remain for the forseeable future) apathy. If people cared enough to want to really do something, but were then made to feel afraid then I suspect that would piss off the average Briton (or anyone else for that matter). A lot of people when faced with what they perceive as bullying will (if at all feasible) resort to bloody mindedness. Or so it seems to me.

This is not to deny anything you've said re: this type of legislaiton and use of pwoers being "normalised", but as always - I would emphasise that if a critical mass was reached (of "ordinary people" I mean) then a lot of policy could easily be defied And this critical mass would only need to be a very small number of people. Especially if support was not 100% firm amongst those who implement policy (i.e. the police, courts, civil servants, etc).
Dante Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12 Aug 2007, 12:37   #8
Dante Hicks
Clerk
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 13,940
Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Get those terrorists!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dda
However, non-violent protests aimed at changing governmental policies which disrupt the activities of the citizenry, as opposed to disrupting the routine of the government, usually causes a backlash which actually harms the cause and allows the government to become more repressive in response, with the blessings of the populace.
The problem with this is that in all modern countries (even your own) large sections of the citizenry are directly involved with, or recepients of, the "routine of government".

If you had a magic switch which would stop all government payroll/payments until you re-enabled it (which rested on some demand - say immediate withdrawl from Iraq) then while theoretically ingenious the real-worl impact would br horrific.

The first people to feel the impact would be those dependent on social security or state pension payments (who would often have little to no savings). Poorer neighbourhoods would be devestated fairly quickly, presumably abandoned by police (would you patrol Brixton / Compton for no pay?) Then it would rise up through the huge number of people employed by the government directly and indirectly - along with those who depend on the services provided by those civil servants most of all.

The people who would feel the effects personally last would be the wealthy and with them the top tiers of government (i.e. the people you are attempting to influence). The people who guard the cabinet are presumably chosen for pathological loyalty above all else and contingency plans would ensure, as much as possible, that the very top members would be (on a personal level) insulated from the effects as much as possible. Obviously (if we assume this magic switch is unbeatable) you'd "win" your demands at some point - the army would deserte after a while if nothing else. But I suspect the government would let at least few pensioners starve to death before giving in and in that period you'd have the press endlessly demanding death to the criminals scum responsible for murdering these poor OAPs (i.e. you).

Of course, that's a huge and unrealistic example, but the point is that decision makers are well defended on a personal level. So it's difficult to know how one can interrupt the routine of government in an effective manner. The protests which seem to work are the ones aimed at "softer" targets. I have no sympathy at all for animal rights campaigners, but a tiny hardcore of activists have had what seems like a huge impact on a large industry in Britain.

Not by taking on the government to change the law, but by threatening and attacking scientists, their families and also shareholders in the companies directly involved in animal testing. Their tactics are cowardly and shameful, and if they tried to directly threaten the Prime Minister in that fashion then they would have been shot dead by now. Which presumably is why they haven't done so. And to a limited extent, it's worked. Less companies want the hassle of being involved in such things, and the share prices of affected companies is artificially lowered. Some operaitons have ceased operating, others have gone to the US. Violence does work, unfortunately - even without general rebellion.

In lieu of a mass movement, the only tactics I would endorse at present are basically tedious legalistic ones. For instance, there is a law, as you may know, which makes it illegal to protest near Parliament without prior written approval. Mark Thomas (a comedian) has engaged in a campaign of protests against this restriction by simply endlessly complying with the law. And he has send in literally thousands upon thousands of requests for protests (which have to be processed in a set fashion). Always staying within the rules but being relentless in your requests. In doing so, it increases (sometimes dramatically) the cost of having such rules. Such things do have an impact. It may not change the law, but it can act as a deterent on further moves.

Of course, such tactics would be useless if the state was genuinely threatened - there would simply be emergency declared and you would be arrested or worse. But in these sorts of periods, it might well be the best method of gradual resistance without open defiance of the law.

Last edited by Dante Hicks; 12 Aug 2007 at 12:48.
Dante Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12 Aug 2007, 15:17   #9
Hebdomad
I ♡ ☠
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 834
Hebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Get those terrorists!

Dante, I agree that it's a domino effect starting with society's most brave and that this threat probably does not affect the crucial first stage of the domino effect. However, the new interpretations of this law allows a sustained attack and vilification of these people. By arguing these protesters have used terrorist tactics instead of lawful ones (the ones that attract less attention) the government can implicitly label them as terrorists, and due to the meaning of the word terrorist, they are thus everyone's enemy.

Of course, it depends on how the majority of people interpret the word terrorist. I'm just not convinced most people think about this that much and thus could be manipulated by this implicit labeling.

By vilifying societies most radical/brave the government can prevent the critical mass needed for policy change.
Hebdomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14 Aug 2007, 01:54   #10
Dante Hicks
Clerk
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 13,940
Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Dante Hicks has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Get those terrorists!

Fortunately the government have done enormous damage to their credibility on the "terrorism" issue generally. Even among my conservative colleagues, I've not encountered anyone who takes the terrorist threat anyway near as seriously as the government wants us to. Even among those who think we should probably be killing arabs on general principle tend to seem to be basically aware that...
a) The Iraq war was not about WMD
b) Terrorism where it is a threat is much more of a threat thanks us to our ****ed up foriegn policy
c) Terrorism has killed something like 60 people in the UK since 2002 or so. In the same period there's been more than fifteen thousand road accident deaths.

As I've said elsewhere - Nelson Mandela was called a terrorist. One of the parties which shares power in Northern Ireland were called terrorists. The Suffragettes would have been called terrorists if the term was used then (I've no idea). Terrorism doesn't have the stigma it does in the US - or so it seems.

Now, if the government was going to call all protestors paedophiles...
Dante Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Aug 2007, 15:33   #11
Hebdomad
I ♡ ☠
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 834
Hebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldHebdomad spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Get those terrorists!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante Hicks
Fortunately the government have done enormous damage to their credibility on the "terrorism" issue generally. Even among my conservative colleagues

But most people are not interested in politics at all. It's conjecture to suggest how the government/media can manipulate them, but I'm not optimistic that they'll link lies about Iraq to this.
Hebdomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:43.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018