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

171–180 of 224 posts

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

#171

Post by pbiggar »

ben_w wrote: post #115
willahmad wrote: post #108

Why is it my earlier comment with so many upvotes got [flagged] ? Is it because I mentioned the entity name? Here is the comment: "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 sh…

Dunno for sure, but I'd suggest that mentioning Israel when it's the UK doing it, it might possibly look a bit like shoe-horning in a capital-A-Agenda. The UK doesn't really have much of a good history on the topic of listening to political dissent from within. The Sex Pistols comes to mind, and the Winter of Discontent, and the anti-Iraq-war march, and the Troubles, and police kettling a few decades back, and a bike…

Because there are huge protests in the UK at the moment for Palestine, which led them to "proscribe" the group Palestine Action. Then everyone (correctly) freaked out about civil liberties, and you can now see videos of grannies being arrested by the UK police for having an "i support Palestine Action" sign multiple times a week.

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

#172

Post by pbiggar »

pmarreck wrote: post #82
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.

Critiquing Israel as well as any political or religious entity or set of beliefs should be allowed, or there will be problems. This is basically the Paradox of Tolerance coupled with the fact that intolerance itself seems to be a viral meme if left unchecked. I still can't believe the UK has arrested people based on their social media posts. Why are people standing for that, over there? (I'm a US citizen.) Meanwhile,…

I can't tell or not, but are you aware that the US has deported/arrested thousands of people for their social media posts?

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

#173

Post by _DeadFred_ »

tremon wrote: post #138
ben_w wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so, I never got the impression that Israel is all that big a deal in the UK in either direction. If they are, they're a lot more subtle about it than they are with regard to USA politics.

The fact that peaceful protesters against the Gaza genocide got labeled as terrorists should be sufficient evidence that the UK government still very much shares their bed with Israel.

Wasn't that after that specific protest group broke into a military base and damaged military aircraft? Pretty sure that gets your group labeled no matter what 'banner' you do that sort of damage under.

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

#174

Post by ben_w »

IAmBroom wrote: post #137
ben_w wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Yes, but I wouldn't put "independence movements" in that list. Much as I'm relaxed about the Welsh and Scots' independence movements, for Northern Ireland to do whatever it wants including the current kicking-can…

So, you support the government labeling those movements as "subversion"? Your opinion isn't very clear here. If so, why are those movements so different, or are you supporting the government's move entirely, because of those cases?

Noticing that an issue has two opposing sides with good points doesn't mean I must pick a side to favour, nor even that I am competent to do so.

I'm in no position to weigh these things even in isolation, let alone against each other.

All I can do is say that I sympathise with everyone in the UK who wants independence from Westminster, and yet I would absolutely abuse the hell out of that kind of sentiment if I was a foreign agent trying to undermine the UK. Divide and conquor, very old technique.

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

#175

Post by fakedang »

whynotmaybe wrote: post #101
fakedang wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already on it. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/british-man-arr...

Gonna need a follow up on that one. > was then interrogated over the picture and another photo of a house he shared on social media – which he told police he had never been to and was taken by someone else. > The allegations about stalking and illegal possession of a firearm were dropped, but he was then charged with a public order offence for a different social media post. Either the police is exaggerating, either t…

The fact that there is even a "public order offence" for shit posted on social media is telling enough about the UK. The British should stop claiming to be a free democracy. Democracy they might be, but free they are not.

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

#176

Post by Zigurd »

ben_w wrote: post #119
aranw wrote: post #70

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…

> 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. Yes, but I wouldn't put "independence movements" in that list. Much as I'm relaxed about the Welsh and Scots' independence movements, for Northern Ireland to do whatever it wants including the current kicking-can…

I would do the same. But the response should be to root out foreign influence campaigns, and foreign money sponsoring divisive voices. A policy that marks your own people as subversive starts from a disadvantaged position.

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

#177

Post by LightBug1 »

dfawcus wrote: post #136
LightBug1 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering what is happening to the Palestine Action protestors right now in the UK, your waiving away of concerns is hard to read. Give an inch and they (current, or future governments) are given more scope to attempt to take a mile through interpretation or overreach. - Broad discretionary powers - Vague thresholds - Pre-emptive justification - Lack of neutral limits (time, geography, number of events) - Expansion…

One of the problems with Palestine Action is the violent protests they have previously engaged in. There is a trial in progress at the moment relating to an attack on Elbit Systems where one of the "protestors" seemed to attack a WPC with a sledgehammer. Apparently having caused serious harm to her spine. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c79727zeqyvo So the folks holding signs expressing their support for the group…

You're conflating the actions of an individual with the goals and aims of the PA organisation. I'm certain their intent is not to harm people. You've described one incident where an individual got carried away with serious consequences for the victim and, likely, the alleged perpetrator.

Also, your reasoning is a little backward about the Judicial Review. I am 100% certain than one of the reasons the Judicial Review was granted at all was due to the strong support and the arrests of thousands of PA supporters.

Lastly, those who stepped up to get arrested did so in the full knowledge of the personal consequences they may face. They used their apparent right to protest to make all of the above happen. If they'd listened to you, nothing would have happened.

That would be a good example of the chilling consequences of the Authoritarian creep we're talking about in this thread.

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

#178

Post by Zigurd »

blackwateragent wrote: post #65
willahmad wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...?

TBF despite the fact you're right, it's still beside the point. Some protests are seen as more wholesome than others.

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

#179

Post by red-iron-pine »

tim333 wrote: post #109

>Government plans new powers to label ... as ‘subversion’ As far as I can see is a lie the website has made up. None of their links include the word subversion. Subversion is not part of British law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subversion#United_Kingdom Is there some reality to this or is the website just making stuff up to object to some things they dislike?

propaganda, on the internet? NEVER

incidentally...

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

#180

Post by siddge »

ben_w wrote: post #130
gadders wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The UK Supreme Court ruling went out of its way to say that it wasn't vindicating any such position, saying: It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word “woman” other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010. It has a more limited role which does not involve making policy. The principal qu…

That's because the Supreme Court's job is statutory interpretation, not making political statements. But given that it's such a politically divisive topic, I think it's clear they felt the need to remind readers of the FWS judgment that it's about the former and not the latter, and that it should be considered in this framing.

That it also happens to be a major and very welcome win for women's rights is orthogonal to the intentions of the UKSC.

Post reply on HN