Here Comes Totalitarianism.

[Canary42]

Big Brother speaks.

Britain is too “passively tolerant” and should not leave people to live their lives as they please just because they obey the law, David Cameron has said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-is-too-tolerant-and-should-interfere-more-in-peoples-lives-says-david-cameron-10246517.html

But this doesn't apply to fat cats, right wing press barons, and bankers of course.

[Svejk]

Not sure I like the sound of this. Mrs May was trying to explain it on the radio yesterday. She made it sound suspiciously like a clampdown on 'thought-crime'. I don't like a lot of the opinions on AB but I wouldn't like to see you getting carted off to chokey. (well, most of you ;-))

[douglas9401]

More pish from Dave's Bumper Book Of Big Ideas, just like The Big Society.

Oh well, he was voted in so that's democracy. Enjoy more of the same (or worse) for five more years as his mates cream off what's left of the country.

[Hypognosis]

Saw this all over Twitter, last night. General concensus seems to be "WTAF, Dave??"

[fiction-factory]

I'm always puzzled by comments such as "and bankers of course". Which bankers? Cashiers, call centre staff, IT staff?
But I would agree that this concept Cameron/May are referring to has not been thought through very well

[naomi24]

Canary, oh my goodness! What a dramatic headline – and what utter nonsense! This is about tackling extremism. David Cameron is right. Britain is too passively tolerant. That's why people like Anjem Choudary are free to carry on creating division in our society with their hate-filled bile, and why hoards of madmen are free to call for the slaughter of British soldiers and for the beheading of anyone who criticises Islam. I’m delighted that at long last we have a government that has the guts to confront problem head on. Good for them!

Try another report. The proposals may become clearer to you.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32714802

[Gromit]

As usual the rhetoric sounds good, but the imlementation has not been though through so it will fail.

// Courts to force a person to send their tweets and Facebook posts to the police for approval. //

Except there will no extra money for extra police to carry out this function. It will either be unenforcable and not happen, or peple will be locked up for tweeting when they have tweeted when banned. Not good

// Ofcom will have new powers to pressurise broadcasters which show content deemed “extreme” //

Ofcom already deny licenses to extreme channels. 'Pressurise' is a loose term which means the broadcaster (if there are any) do not have to yeild to offcoms suggestions. In short, it is a toothless measure. It also only comes into force AFTER the extremist material is broadcast, not before.

// The Charity Commission would be mandated to scrutinise charities who “misappropriate funds”. //

Again, there is no extra money about for the extra work the Charity Commission would be obliged to do. As it is, the Charity Commission investigate complains against a charity. The difference will be that the Government will interfere with their working, telling them who to investgate and who to prioritise. A recipe for disaster which will not work in practice.

[dannyk13]

Another jaundiced diatribe from Canary

[youngmafbog]

So Gromit, Canary et al. What would you do to tackle extremism?

I suspect much of this has been put out to test public opinion. Be interesting to see what we actually end up with.

And I work in a Bank, as far as I can see I have many laws I must obey.

[naomi24]

//So Gromit, Canary et al. What would you do to tackle extremism? //

Seemingly nothing. That's helpful!

[Old_Geezer]

I agree we have been too tolerant of politicians for generations now.

And if they are staying within the law that is no excuse ! Laws aren't there to tell citizens what is right and wrong or ensure they behave properly, are they ? If it were, politicians would many millions more of them to force us to do what they wanted.

Very right wing attitude by Cameron there.

[Gromit]

Ymb/naomi,

I am pointing out that these measures will not work.

The Governing persuing a course that will not work is not really tackling extremism. It is just trying to look like they are doing something, when really they are doing NOTHING.

If the Government were serious, they would properly fund dedicated anti-extremist police and introduce proper legislation. Instead, just telling already busy and under-funded organisations that they have these extra duties that they must do, is trying to do it on the cheap (i.e. Not really tacking the problem at all).

[woofgang]

Well if it would shut Russell Brand up then I am all for it.

[TWR]

H.R. Come to mind, in theory yes, in reality, no, dream on.

[Svejk]

Maybe if the government stopped funding Islamist organisations this would make more sense. Wouldn't surprise me if any new legislation was used to against easy targets like the EDL and Pegida. If this sees the light of day, we shall see.

[joggerjayne]

Isn't totalitarianism where you have ...

One totally dominant party ...

Who pursue their own agenda, even if the majority have expressed a contrary view?

Happily, we don't have anything like that this side of Hadrian's Wall.

[sandyRoe]

Could people who are thought to have spoken too freely pushing unpopular causes be subjected to an order, perhaps from the courts, forcing them to wear a modern day version of a scolds bridle? That would soon shut them up.

[naomi24]

Reading some of the posts here one could be forgiven for thinking people don’t want the government to tackle extremism - but I can't help thinking that if Labour had been gutsy enough to do it the critics would have had no hesitation in proffering their admiration. Political affiliation, and more to the point, political vitriol, prevailing over common sense.

Gromit, the government has only been in office for a week, this initiative, as far as I can tell, was made public yesterday, so I think you’re being a bit ‘previous’ with your gloom and doom. You have no idea what funding will be made available, but nevertheless you condemn, Why not just wait and see?

[joggerjayne]

It's typical.

The whole population keep saying ...

"Someone should do something. Something needs to be done."

And then, as soon as someone says yes, okay, let's do something ... they all go ...

"Ooh, I don't like the sound of that."

[sandyRoe]

Something like this


http://api.ning.com/files/ehtkB8L23Q8cz-eMUw8V4EcnmQYyDsguJTzhPjzEkF1nIE96SiFPN4m6iF-sVwPEYtzHEBv5m0tSNb*Kt7afh3ZExC4*HRes/AScoldsBridlebeingmodelledbyAlfredHills.jpeg

[TWR]

They have had 5 year to sort this out, have they?