is britain literally becoming a police state?

[Streathamite]

No. It indicates an understanding of intent.

not really, no. The BNP are a vastly different animal to the NSDAP, tho' I grant they have some common points of reference. this simply isn't Berlin in 1933, or 1936

 

[hibee]

No. It indicates an understanding of intent.

In neither case is that true. Charles Clarke is no more handing out rubber truncheons and setting up a Chile-style state than Nick Griffin is secretly drawing up plans for a new Auchwitz.

The real dangers - respectively, a piecemeal erosion of many traditional freedoms coupled with a judicial system that allows serious and repeated abuses; or a FN/OFP-style populist chauvanist party winning support from a sizeable section of the public for its dead-end rhetoric - are a lot less lurid. But they are a lot more frightening, because they are possible.

 

[hibee]

oh, absolutely, and I didn't deny that. still say they ain't the only ones historically guilty of this crass stupidity and lazy polemic

Sadly, this is very true.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Charles Clarke is no more handing out rubber truncheons and setting up a Chile-style state than Nick Griffin is secretly drawing up plans for a new Auchwitz.

In the first case, I doubt that your comrades claim that he is. In the second, I wonder if I would not beg to differ.

There's a fair bit of hyperbole about, but it's as much "about" as "from". The perspective problem here may be partly of your own making.

 

[hibee]

In the first case, I doubt that your comrades claim that he is. In the second, I wonder if I would not beg to differ.

There's a fair bit of hyperbole about, but it's as much "about" as "from". The perspective problem here may be partly of your own making.

As far as the BNP goes, I don't want to derail so I'll refer you to my arguments on the protest board.

You may think I have a problem with perspective, but some members of the left wittering on in exaggerated Dave Spart language ("er...") that bears no relation to reality to the ordinary person in the street is one of many reasons why the left is so fucked.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Well, y'know, I think you might reflect that "the let" involves many different people saying many different things and that you can't really do a lot about the facvt that people are going to exaggerate, get things wrong and so on. It strikes me that it's only a version of the same urge to have the right line on everything which is one of the problems of these organisations.

 

[hibee]

I'm far from arguing for a "correct line" - I'm calling for and end of this intellectual sloppiness which does seem to be in evidence round these parts.

And I've been careful to talk about "some" members of the left.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Yeah, but the point is there'll always be somebody. It's kind of a waste of time and it does, in fact, exhibit a similar inability to deal with this that is among the demerits of narrow-line politics.

Don't like Trot-bashing much, me. It's negative.

 

[cemertyone]

It's obvious, fela, that you have no understanding of what a police state really is.

Perhaps you would be good enough to enlighten us then.....?????????

 

[hibee]

But this sort of lazy thinking is not just the preserve of a deluded few. It is orthodoxy among some groups.

And the likes of Herbert Reed will tell you I don't just do this as a way of trot-bashing...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

But this sort of lazy thinking is not just the preserve of a deluded few. It is orthodoxy among some groups.

Even if that were true, so what? Let it go.

 

[hibee]

So I'm supposed to ignore people talking shit? That's not what I though these boards were about.

And indeed Mr Ferrentes, there may be a slight pot/kettle aspect to this...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

So I'm supposed to ignore people talking shit?

Not entirely, no, but you know, a sense of proportion and purpose, perhaps.

 

[Top Dog]

fela lives in Thailand, which seems like far more of a police state than the UK, so maybe he should know what a police state is like?

Ya get me?

i get ya, but youre talking shit. As others have already pointed out to you its the sloppy use of phraseology as scaremongering that is actually counter productive to preserving civil liberties... It simply loses you any credibility among the constituencies you are trying to have influence within. Like RW et al prefacing everything as the "nazi" BNP, without any attempt to understand what is really going on and how we all might effectively respond. Its a long redundant leftist ploy that has tarred all oppositional politics in the same way making it resemble a toothless laughing stock.

Was that what you were seeking?

 

[hibee]

I'm not sure I follow your argument. Fair enough if I was complaining about verbs being conjugated or whatever. But the whole basis for some commonly-held assumptions on the left are not only lazy, they are based on a society several decades out of date.

If people's arguments making sense or otherwise doesn't interest you, why post on a politics forum?

 

[TeeJay]

i get ya, but youre talking shit. As others have already pointed out to you its the sloppy use of phraseology as scaremongering that is actually counter productive to preserving civil liberties... It simply loses you any credibility among the constituencies you are trying to have influence within. Like RW et al prefacing everything as the "nazi" BNP, without any attempt to understand what is really going on and how we all might effectively respond. Its a long redundant leftist ploy that has tarred all oppositional politics in the same way making it resemble a toothless laughing stock.

Was that what you were seeking?

WTF?

I haven't actually said Thailand or the UK are police states. I was just saying that Thailand is further along the scale of having authoritarian/human rights abusing police than the UK is. The remark was aimed at fela.

I'm not sure why you think I am a "leftist" or whatever... most people here would say I am a 'liberal', and the only party I support/vote for are the Greens although I would be at the mainstream end of the party if I was still actually a member.

Are you sure you haven't got me/my posts confused with some of the other posters on this thread?

 

[Top Dog]

WTF?

I haven't actually said Thailand or the UK are police states. I was just saying that Thailand is further along the scale of having authoritarian/human rights abusing police than the UK is. The remark was aimed at fela.

try as you might to wriggle out of that one you said:

fela lives in Thailand, which seems like far more of a police state than the UK, so maybe he should know what a police state is like?

which is tantamount to endorsing his view. /\

Yes, im aware of your politics and on questions like these, liberalism and leftism are often virtually indistinguishable

 

[TeeJay]

...which is tantamount to endorsing his view.

endorsing whose view?

I never said that the UK or Thailand are police states. I was merely pointing out that Thailand is significantly further along the scale towards repression than the UK - "which seems like far more of a police state than the UK".

A police state is a state in which the government maintains strict political or social control over the population without adhering to the rule of law. It is the antithesis of the Rechtsstaat ("legal" or "constitutional" state).

The term usually only refers to a regime which claims that the exercise of political power by the state is not subject to law, although regimes which disregard the law in practice may nevertheless constitute police states as a matter of fact, regardless of whether or not they claim to abide by the rule of law.

In contemporary popular usage, "police state" is often considered to be synonymous with "dictatorship". As it has become a term of opprobrium, the formerly narrowly defined and technical definition of the police state has been expanded in recent decades to sometimes include regimes which do not respect individual rights and freedoms, whether or not these rights and freedoms are enshrined in law. At other times the term may sometimes conveys nothing more than disapproval of the policies of a certain government.

Modern police states usually employ some sort of secret police or similar apparatus, although these elements are not considered essential to the definition. The best-known literary treatment of this sort of police state is George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which describes a totalitarian régime that uses the threat of constant war as a pretext for subjecting the people to continuous mass surveillance in all aspects of their lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_states

Edit - to add: Thai police deciding to wipe out large numbers of drugs users qualifies as 'disregarding the law in practice'. If this was under the instruction of the president then the state is directly implicated. Hence 'more of a police state'. However Thailand does have a judicial system and isn't a police state legally speaking.

 

[Top Dog]

endorsing whose view?

I never said that the UK or Thailand are police states. I was merely pointing out that Thailand is significantly further along the scale towards repression than the UK - "which seems like far more of a police state than the UK".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_states

Edit - to add: Thai police deciding to wipe out large numbers of drugs users qualifies as 'disregarding the law in practice'. If this was under the instruction of the president then the state is directly implicated. Hence 'more of a police state'. However Thailand does have a judicial system and isn't a police state legally speaking.

this is just just wordplay TeeJay. And so what if felafan lives in thailand anyway? does that mean his views/opinions are really that much more qualified or beyond reproach? I dont need to go to thailand, for instance, to find out that there is probably more police violence and corruption than in the UK... ffs! And anyway you're taking this off the point. The OP wasnt talking about Thailand it was talking about the UK. So in your view, "is the UK literally [sic] becoming a police state"?

One more thing... throwing wikipedia out as providing some kind of objective, empirical 'evidence' does not in fact prove or add anything to your argument

 

[TeeJay]

Everything we do here is wordplay

I disagree with fela fan that the UK is a "police state" and my point in mentioning Thailand was to contrast the UK favourably with it, to make my point. It obviously wasn't aimed at you.

So in your view, "is the UK literally [sic] becoming a police state"?

I have already answered that above. No.

One more thing... throwing wikipedia out as providing some kind of objective, empirical 'evidence' does not in fact prove or add anything to your argument

I didn't claim it was "objective, empirical 'evidence'". I merely quoted it as it described the various ideas of a "police state" better than I could, it saved me a lot of time and it is something that has been picked over by a lot of people which gives it more 'inter-subjective stability' than something I simply write myself. Why on earth you think that political philosophy should require "empirical" evidence I don't know - or maybe it's you who has got wrapped up in "wordplay" now?

 

[fela fan]

have you renounced citizenship yet fela?

Of course not mate. That would be renoucing a big part of who i am. Anyway, it's impossible coz of sport.

 

[Top Dog]

So in your view, "is the UK literally [sic] becoming a police state"?

No

Why on earth you think that political philosophy should require "empirical" evidence I don't know

as my previous comment suggested, im not proposing that empiricism is necessary, im just wondering why you chose wikipedia to try to define what a police state is when you could have outlined your own view in a few sentences... but you have now explained you did this because it outlines it better than you could and to save time... so we'll leave it there shall we?

 

[fela fan]

It's obvious, fela, that you have no understanding of what a police state really is.

And it is therefore obvious that you have no understanding of question marks and eliciting others' opinions are.

 

[fela fan]

Spare us your clueless pronouncements from afar.

In this post you ignore TWO question marks. I am asking mate, not pronouncing. Get that into your bloody head eh.

 

[fela fan]

whats that got to do with anything TeeJay?

Indeed top dog. But it's common practice amongst people who hate criticism of themselves. Even if it is actually critical analysis. Not quite the same thing now...

 

[fela fan]

fela lives in Thailand, which seems like far more of a police state than the UK, so maybe he should know what a police state is like?

[quit bringing in decontextualised quotes from other threads]

In my opinion britain is more of a police state than thailand. I judge that based on the average person's level of daily interference from the police force.

 

[fela fan]

WTF?

I haven't actually said Thailand or the UK are police states. I was just saying that Thailand is further along the scale of having authoritarian/human rights abusing police than the UK is. The remark was aimed at fela.

And since i'm the target, what the fuck has thailand got to do with the premise of my thread? Does its level of police stateness affect the situation in britain?

Face it mate, you fucked up.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

[quit bringing in decontextualised quotes from other threads]

In my opinion britain is more of a police state than thailand. I judge that based on the average person's level of daily interference from the police force.

But you don't have any experience at all of the average person's level of daily interference from the police force in the UK.

 

[fela fan]

endorsing whose view?

I never said that the UK or Thailand are police states. I was merely pointing out that Thailand is significantly further along the scale towards repression than the UK - "which seems like far more of a police state than the UK".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_states

Edit - to add: Thai police deciding to wipe out large numbers of drugs users qualifies as 'disregarding the law in practice'. If this was under the instruction of the president then the state is directly implicated. Hence 'more of a police state'. However Thailand does have a judicial system and isn't a police state legally speaking.

Okay teejay. Firstly as i just said, i reckon britain exhibits more aspects that indicate a police state than thailand. But only since you brought the bloody country into this debate in the first place. As if that would negate my QUESTIONS.

Secondly, the thai police didn't decide to do anything with regards to drugs. Their actions were based on the political flavour of the day (rather like blair and his gang).

Thirdly, you need to use the past tense. It happened, it's over, and as for the ramifications, start a new thread. Coz it will have no bearing whatsoever on any answers that my thread was seeking.

 

[Poi E]

Nah, not a police state, but I would wager that any powers that are given to the executive under current and proposed legislation will remain on the statute books. It's a shame as the UK had such a wonderful history of civil liberties but is rapidly becoming a shadow of its former self.