Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

netpol.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 224 posts

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#61

Post by [deleted] »

viraptor wrote: post #45
dvt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is becoming so partisan, it's starting to get on my nerves. The bill text is here[1]. It's extremely benign and the article linked, in fact, argues against it's own straw-man, found in another cited article[2]: > Yet, another way to view ‘cumulative’ or repeated protests is as sustained public action for justice, solidarity and freedom. So yes, if you interpret some random bill amendment in whatever way favors you…

> So yes, if you interpret some random bill amendment in whatever way favors your side, That is how laws often get interpreted. It gives the decision to a police officer. Do you think the police officer will ever make a decision which does not favour their side?

[deleted]

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#62

Post by fidotron »

willahmad wrote: post #2

It’s ironic how the West has long championed democracy, demanded freedom of speech, and called for human rights from everyone. Only to suddenly adopt authoritarian, anti-free speech, anti-human rights, and anti-protest stances the moment free speech began to critique Israel. It’s truly shameful to see such developments.

> It’s ironic how the West has long championed democracy, demanded freedom of speech, and called for human rights from everyone.

What's really remarkable is how completely the illusion that this is what they were doing lasted in those countries. Some authority somewhere is cursing letting plebs on the Internet for destroying this.

Ask a latin american and see if they think that's what has been going on.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#64

Post by nailer »

OgsyedIE wrote: post #9
logicchains wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It started before that. The powers that be in western European countries can no longer deliver prosperity or security to their citizens, so must instead use force and repression to cling on to power.

The Wikipedia page on the Swing Riots of 1830 is a great example of how it goes.

Link to proper source https://blogs.kent.ac.uk/ageofrevolution/riots/the-swing-rio...

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#65

Post by blackwateragent »

willahmad wrote: post #31
ThrowawayTestr wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You truly believe this change is because of Israel?

Did it happen when people protested Russian invasion? No Did it happen when people protested China for the treatment of Uyghurs? No Did it happen when people speak up (no protests, yet) about UAE involvement in Sudan? No I made my own conclusions based on these and other similar data points.

Its almost 2026 and you still believe the uyghur propaganda...?

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#66

Post by vogon_laureate »

ThrowawayTestr wrote: post #39
kg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The uk has specifically banned support for Palestine Action so it's a reasonable conclusion

Didn't that group attack an RAF base?

And violently sledgehammered a female police officer breaking her spine.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#67

Post by JetSetWilly »

jimnotgym wrote: post #58
JetSetWilly wrote: post #41

[flagged]

In your view, is it right to categorise PA alongside Al Quaida?

Yes. They are both groups that only exist to commit violence against people to further their political aims. They may differ in how extreme they are, but the core of it is they are violent and we should have absolute zero tolerance against such groups.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#68

Post by nailer »

js8 wrote: post #40
sph wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” History, just like everything else in Nature, is cyclical.

It's a protofascist phrase, part of the problems we have is people adopting this worldview, that life has to be hard in order to create "good men". It's used to defend rightwing social darwinism. If anything, history goes the other way around. Fascism ("strong men") comes from good times, as a reaction. They create authoritarianism and discrimination ("bad times"), which slowly liberalizes and equalizes (gives rise t…

The phrase is commonly used amongst conservatives, yes. Labelling it “proto fascist” is ridiculous.

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#69

Post by happymellon »

ThrowawayTestr wrote: post #39
kg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The uk has specifically banned support for Palestine Action so it's a reasonable conclusion

Didn't that group attack an RAF base?

Attack is a strong word for throwing a can of paint.

After the 2024 riots there were mass arrests and prosecution, but only talk about reviewing groups as to whether they should be proscribed.

Why does a member throwing a can of paint get you classed as a terrorist organisation, while organising riots that involve throwing molotov's and causing serious injury not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_riots

Re: UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'

#70

Post by aranw »

There is probably a legitimate basis for some powers against actual foreign intelligence operations. But the proposals in the article defining "subversion" to include environmental activism, independence movements, or criticism of UK policy show how quickly these things expand beyond their original scope. The Terrorism Act was meant to exclude domestic activists but two decades later it has been used against protest groups
Post reply on HN