Big Brother taking over in UK

Originally posted by manta
This idea seems crazy to me, by keeping these people in school for 2 years more all that will be achieved is the disrupted learning of those who actualy want to be their.

I left school at 17 after finishing 1 year more education than i was required to by law. After that i saw no point in staying on any longer. I didnt have a clue what i wanted to do so i did nothing. Under the governments plan i would be fined for this, and how exactly is anyone who isn't working supposed to pay for it?

I bet this idea came from the same people that had the brillian idea of banning christmas so any non-christians wouldn't be offended.

thats where the idea of national service should be applied me thinks

Here's the deal...be thankful it's just a fine. Probably a lot of the neds can't pay it and will just take a hit on their credit score. How is this big brother? It's the government rightfully charging for services received.

Its a form of enforced social control.

I suppose this is how you start falling down the road of the Authoritarian State when the people do not notice their freedoms being eroded.

I thought this was interesting, talking about the author of 1984. George Orwell.

Orwell's ideas about personal freedom and state authority developed when he was a British colonial administrator in Burma. He was fascinated by the effect of colonialism on the individual person, requiring acceptance of the idea that the colonialist oppressor exists for the good of the oppressed person and people.

[edit on 5-11-2007 by Grimholt]

reply to post by Grimholt


So, you're willing to subsidize another's laziness?

ahhh colonialism, authoritarianism.... Man, this is a slippery slope they are starting down. History has dictated more and more, people will live freely. This will continue for a few more decades, then something will happen and spark something . All answers to this style lay in our past.

Originally posted by alterclassical
reply to post by Grimholt

 

So, you're willing to subsidize another's laziness?

Nope. Just think that adding to the lazy people woes will do more harm then good.

I think the National Service solution is a better idea...anyway I'm off the high horse now. It was just my thoughts on it.

reply to post by Grimholt


Personally, I feel that NS is more authoritarian. I would rather have to pay a fine than to be dragooned into some kind of forced community service project.

Its the first good idea they've come up with to stop Scum getting there Giro and sitting on street corners drinking and smoking it all away, So it gets my vote, Then again we could do what David Cameron said and Hug a chav But id be checking for my wallet afterwards!

National service isn't the solution.

I don't want our defence budget wasted on conscripts who don't want to be there - it should be spent on the real soldiers, sailors, pilots and support personnel who are out on the front lines defending our interests. Besides, it's small enough already... adding ten thousand or more national servicemen/women will mean stretching the budget even further.

I appreciate the need for people to make their own choices in life, and part of me feels that this new law is a bit of a gimmick to make it look as if the government is in control (to those of you who think the UK is a 'Big Brother' state, I would disagree with you... the police and the government can't even properly stop young people causing trouble on the streets on a Friday and Saturday night, let alone cow a whole population! ). On the other hand, compelling them to do something worthwhile with their days might give them a sense of respect for themselves (which is essential) and other people. Let alone cutting the benefits bill and having more money to put into the tax pot (which is essential for things like pensions and the NHS as Britain has to sustain an increasing number of older people).

StuMason started a threat a while back regarding the subject of 'Big Brother' in the UK (so as not to derail this thread with such comments). I encourage you to read it here. It's thirteen pages long as of 5th Nov, but it might just put to rest a few of those myths that seem to be floating around about an Orwellian Britain.

It makes me laugh, seeing people from the US going on about erosion of civil liberty in another country

Here's a few examples of american "civil liberty"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It seems that SOME of the US members here are very quick to judge other countries, but consistently bury their heads in the sand when it comes to the problems of freedom and civil liberties in their own backyard.

As for me, I'd rather live in the UK - at least our government are up front about these things, rather than constantly bringing them in the back door.

I've often thought the UK was a testbed for U.S. government steps towards tyranny. First outlaw the guns and see how the public reacts. They seem to be fine with being an unarmed society...few realize they have no power now to ever resist their government. Sleep well my flock...

reply to post by CyberSEAL


This is probably one of the single silliest posts I've ever seen on here.

Do yourself a favour - go and do some research (I assume you know what it is and how to do it) then come back and post when you have some facts at your disposal.

In the meantime, read the links I posted - then talk about US civil liberties.

I don't need to read any of those links to know that the U.S. is in trouble. If you reread what I said it makes some sense. If the U.S. is as tyranical as some would say, why wouldn't the powers-that-be facilitate or at the very least observe what happens when other, smaller, democracies strip their inhabitants of freedom.

What I posted is directly related to what you posted previously. Yes, elements of the United States government are invading the privacy of Americans and slowly removing some of our freedoms. Why wouldn't they take cue's from other countries who have taken advanced measures in this regard?

reply to post by CyberSEAL


Why don't you get some facts about "surveillance" in the UK - this BS about an orwellian society is just that - BS. The US has more government camera's per capita than the UK - FACT.

We are not sheep, and have more chance of removing a government than in the US - remember florida?

So before you insinuate that the people of the UK are sheep, and that we have no chance because we have no guns, and that we blindly follow where the US leads, I suggest you get your facts straight.

Sweeping generalisations like the ones you made are for sheep.

There was a time when the government had no say in peoples lives. That time is sadly over. Why do people constantly turn a blind eye to these kinds of things? Do they not realize THEY elected these officials. THEY vote on who they want in power. THEY control the government and not the other way around.

If I had my way EVERY single bill brought up in parliament would have to be voted on by voters.

Anyone remember back when people survived on nothing but farm land? Totally self reliant, peaceful, no government causing hassles. We do not need a government. In reality an Anarchistic society is the best way to go. But of course for that to happen everyone would have to trust everyone else and we know that will never happen.

Anyways I'm done with my rants today. Rant over.

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by CyberSEAL

 

Why don't you get some facts about "surveillance" in the UK - this BS about an orwellian society is just that - BS. The US has more government camera's per capita than the UK - FACT.

We are not sheep, and have more chance of removing a government than in the US - remember florida?

So before you insinuate that the people of the UK are sheep, and that we have no chance because we have no guns, and that we blindly follow where the US leads, I suggest you get your facts straight.

Sweeping generalisations like the ones you made are for sheep.

I never said anything about an Orwellian UK or cameras. Your tone leads me to believe you lack an open mind about these things and are overrun with nationalist pride. Your society is disarmed and will never again have the power to stand up to your government if it needed to. It's coming here too, within the next decade or two.

reply to post by CyberSEAL


Perhaps not - but you insinuated about UK people being sheep in a thread that has more than once contained the word orwellian, and the undertone of your posts has reinforced this.

As for your other remark - UK citizens do not need to be armed, and neither do the citizens of any other civilized country - that's why we have armed forces.
Our police are unarmed for the most part, and the armed forces are sworn to obey the queen - that's why the PM has to get permission from her to deploy them.

This has nothing to do with a nationalistic stance, and everything to do with ignorance on your part.

Like I said, do some research before you comment on another country - either that or stick to your own.



[edit on 5/11/2007 by budski]

Do you recall how the United States was formed? In case you forgot, it was men with guns who stood up to an unfair and tyranical government (your's, lol!).

If you think you live in a "civilized" society where the government is not corrupt and the military will always be controlled by fair people who have your best interests in heart...then you are delusional.

In any developed nation ninety-percent of the intelligence is held by ten-percent of the population, hence the "sheep" argument holds water no matter what country you're applying it to.

reply to post by CyberSEAL


In other words, you are suggesting that the government has remained unchanged for over 2 hundred years?

Or that circumstances are similar now to then?

Sorry, but apart from being off topic, that's total, unadulterated drivel.

click, ignore




[edit on 5/11/2007 by budski]

reply to post by Grimholt


Anyone from Britain - Scotland in particular, knows that it will never happen on the scale people think it will.
There are far too many drug addicts (Scotland and London are only second to Wales when it comes to the amount of drugs being taken)
they will propose umpteen warnings, then call you in for an interview a few times, then more warning letters...they deal with idol threats. There are nowhere near enough police to enforce anything - the amount of violence, racism, bigotry and underage drinking going on with under 16's nowadays is unreal.
And, about restricting peoples voice - it happens already.
Muslims and anyone not 'mainstream' are f@~#'& in most places in Scotland.
Since when does having a facial piercing restrict your ability to think?? Last time i checked, my IQ was included in the top 3% of Britain (130 or over) Scare old people...get a grip...and yes, i am bitter lol

[edit on 5-11-2007 by plmodel]