171–180 of 298 posts
What’s with england and its complete lack of response to this kind of power grabs?
That requires coordination and corporation in a society that is fragmented. It is hard to have a non-hostile interaction these days let alone unity over an online related issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely not happening in the us too! Certainly no academic visas being cancelled.
Yes, yes! This is all well and good, but whatabout America bad?!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not American and I find the English legal system hilarious. In practically all countries a bunch of smart people got together in the 19th century to write a constitution but the British thought that they were above such petty concerns.
The UK has a constitution, it's just not written in a single place. Many (most?) western societies have a similar concept for civil and criminal law with common law jurisdictions, where precedent is used rather than an explicit, exhaustive legal code. Effectively, the UK's constitution is to written constitutions as common law is to civil law.
No we don't. We have what is referred to as an "uncodified constitution".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncodified_constitution
It is a collection of laws and conventions, but there is nothing set up as an overarching set of rules to guide the country. If something were to happen that was deeply unpopular with what the majority of the country feels "makes us British", there is little we could do about it.
Successful court cases against the government have usually been because the government of the day forgot to pass the law that gave them the power to do whatever move they wanted to make. A constitution change is a much bigger deal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is happening in Britain is people are being actually arrested for “offensive” speech, which is of course subjective, subject to abuse, and open to totalitarian oppression. This is why the First Amendment in the US constitution is so important
I'm happy to be wrong, but I don't believe that's correct. There have been some people arrested for inciting violence via social media during the Southport riots. There is also Tommy Robinson/Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, who has been remanded in custody for contempt of court for continuing to libel an immigrant even after his claims were proven to be false. And by contempt of court, he literally has produced a movie contin…
Yes, but only on the right. The leader of Hope not Hate was not charged for his inflammatory tweets, and then you have this guy saying he hoped right wing protestors' throats would be cut being completely let off:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/15/suspended-labour...
What’s with england and its complete lack of response to this kind of power grabs?
I've lived in the UK for 15 years now and the complete political apathy is probably what bothers me the most about this country. Few years back when they made it so that every ISP had to log your entire browsing history and keep it for a year and 17 different government agencies(including DEFRA, the agriculture ministry!) can access it without a warrant, barely anyone cared. Wasn't really mentioned in public media, o…
Not quite, "inflation" is CPI, as the government will tell you endlessly if you work for it and ask for a pay rise. Student loans go up by RPI (which is almost always higher).
Without passing judgment on the act, this is incredibly misleading. I found the source of the original quotes[0], and they are taken quite out of context. From the article: >First, we are told, the relevant secretary of state (Michelle Donelan) expressed “concern” that the legislation might whack sites such as Amazon instead of Pornhub. In response, officials explained that the regulation in question was “not primari…
instead of posting the journalists story, HN posted some randomers tweet. thats the problem
For the Americans looking at this act, you're maybe putting it in the context of American politics and thinking who cares if the porn sites have my face or id. But in the UK you can be arrested and jailed for saying something online that offends someone else.
actually no. its grossly offensive. Not someone finding it offense. And normally its a legal garnish, for something like trying to get someone else killed or injured via text.
However you can be arrested for organising a protest that someone might reasonably find annoying. That has much less legal oversight.
Without passing judgment on the act, this is incredibly misleading. I found the source of the original quotes[0], and they are taken quite out of context. From the article: >First, we are told, the relevant secretary of state (Michelle Donelan) expressed “concern” that the legislation might whack sites such as Amazon instead of Pornhub. In response, officials explained that the regulation in question was “not primari…
The numbering as Category 1 does suggest that is the first and foremost purpose of the Act.
Aka, this rule does not apply to all current and former members of parliament clause.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There oddly seems to be a concerted effort online to paint the UK as some kind of failing police state recently. This narrative seems to have really taken off with some Americans, who now seem completely convinced that the UK government is some kind of totalitarian oppressor who are snatching people off the streets. Meanwhile, Brits just look on at this narrative wondering what the hell they're talking about. Look, I…
Look, I've been visiting Britain as a tourist for years(since more than 10 years ago) - mostly to visit my friends who live there. Each time i come there it's worse than previous trip, and your whole infrastructure feels oppressive. Constant reminders to be vigilant because something bad might happen(train and metro jingles come to mind) - implying a terrorist attack. Constant reminders that you're watched by cameras…
The Ariana Grande concert bombing was only five years ago. You can see a list of those in the 2020's here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in...