it's a very weird kind of propaganda I see a lot of lately.
Everything is the same and comparable never mind how hyperbolic. Doubt it? be showered with cherry picked micro facts that on the surface are similar.
This rests on the fact that in order to establish a big picture you have to take small facts and agree on the big picture, and that leap from small and verifiable to large and analytic is the place you can inject faith and emotion
The UK is doing some shitty stuff and a man was arrested for wearing a “Plasticine Action” t-shirt a few weeks ago, “Palestine Action” being a proscribed group in the UK, and showing support being an offence. When the mistake was realised he was released after a few hours with an apology.
These things are objectively terrible, shouldn’t be happening. The UK government is under popular and legal pressure to un-proscribe the group as hundreds (thousands?) have been arrested and charged.
But it is not the same as someone being ‘disappeared’ in South American dictatorships, where they would be taken and denied process for years if not killed outright. Yet people here drew that comparison. He was arrested for inconvenient speech! It’s the same! And then I came under fire for defending the actions of the UK, having done nothing of the sort.
But defending the arrest of the man with "Plasticine Action" t-shirt as a mistake (only realized after a "few" hours, god damn!), is god damn ridiculous.
About 2 decades ago I read an article about how bureucracies don't even allow for humor any more, e.g. even clearly joking about having a bomb in the airport is now taboo. Something about rigid inhumane inflexible rules, in my vague memory of that article.
Where airport security has to examine babies for terrorist motives, because it's written in the rules, fuck human reasoning!
Heh in my own estimation arresting supporters of Palestine Action for peacefully protesting is already too close to Iranian autocracy ideal and too far from a "democratic country" ideal which the UK used to be...
It’s awful that they’re arresting people with “Palestine Action” t-shirts too. It’s just not the same thing as actually disappearing people.
That's the point of this thread, no? Things can be bad in different ways and to different degrees.
If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and punch you in the gut, that's a pretty shitty thing to do.
If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and cut your throat then bury your body in the forest, I would like to think we can agree that's worse.
> If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and punch you in the gut, that's a pretty shitty thing to do.
> If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and cut your throat then bury your body in the forest, I would like to think we can agree that's worse.
So at what point can we start saying that violence because of words (or shirts) is bad? How much does it have to hurt? Should we act as if you're a good guy, because it was just a punch? Or should we remove you from power and punish you before your punches turn into throat cutting?
10 years ago, getting arrested for wearing a tshirt with some text on it, would be on an iran/north korea level of shitty governments, something that could never happen "at home" (in uk, eu,...)... now it's somehow become "shitty, but not as bad, because in some other land you'd get shot instead," (and similar excuses). How much closer must UK come to iranian levels, before you start seeing the parallels between the behaviour of the two governments?
We were pointing out "the great firewall of china" not so many years ago as a horrible thing, now we have censorship in EU. How many sites must be added to the EU list to become an equivalent of the chinese "firewall"?
This behaviour has to be stopped now, when it's just arrest and excuses, and not after 10 years when people start getting shot for protesting here too.
> So at what point can we start saying that violence because of words (or shirts) is bad?
Straight away!
> Should we act as if you're a good guy, because it was just a punch?
No, and nobody is asking you to. In fact this is the whole point, can you not distinguish between those two guys?
Neither one is good. You're not being asked to decide one is 'good' and the other 'bad'. You're not being asked to accept that the more minor one is OK because it's not as bad as the other one.
They can both be bad. But they aren't the same. We don't say "Dude A was upset about someone talking smack about his sister too, so he's just as bad as Dude B". Or at least most people wouldn't. But we also don't say "It's fine to punch someone in the gut because at least he didn't cut the guy's throat". Dude A probably gets a night in the cells and a minor punishment, maybe a conviction for assault and released on parole for time served. He's got some anger issues and probably some issues in his relationshp with women. B gets serious jail time.
> now it's somehow become "shitty, but not as bad, because in some other land you'd get shot instead," (and similar excuses)
Nobody's making excuses. That's all on you and how you're deciding to ascribe motivations to other posters. Let me say it again - nobody is saying it's OK. I'm not defending anything. If you think I am I'd invite you to re-read the thread.
> How much closer must UK come to iranian levels, before you start seeing the parallels between the behaviour of the two governments?
One is a strict conservative, theocratic dictatorship that is commiting mass murder in order to hold on to power. The other is a troubled democracy that, as far as anyone can tell, isn't murdering its citizens to keep order but has made some pretty fucked up decisions about what constitutes terrorism and a terrorist organisation. Both of these are bad. But they aren't the same, there are some parallels in their actions, though not so much in either motivation or outcomes. And proclaiming that the actions of the UK or the EU are the same as Iran or Russia or China provides cover for atrocities IMHO, and is straight out of the propaganda playbook those countries like to put about the place. It also just destroys nuance of discussion when basically anything negative may as well be Hitler.
> 10 years ago, getting arrested for wearing a tshirt
Was something that happened occasionally under varying different laws. It was shit then too.
And if you'd worn a pro-IRA t-shirt in the 80s/90s, you'd have faced arrest for that as well. Still would in fact. The major change that people have a problem with in the Plasticine/Palestine action cases is the classification of a pro-Human Rights, direct-action group as a terrorist organisation, and the suppression of speech as a result of that classification. If you'd like to see a list of all the organisations currently classified this way, there's one here - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror...
I don't think many people in the UK have a real problem with this law as it applies to (say) ISIS, or the Wagner Group, though I know that in some other countries (US?) you are more likely to be able to show support for those without facing sanction because of stronger protections of free speech.
I would see it as moving the baseline, which Europe and (more historically) UK was for many people in civil rights area. If we just say that authoritarian countries are still worse, this partly implies that what Western countries are doing is becoming acceptable, as long as it is still "better" or "less bad".
The important point is, if the erosion of civil liberties continues, these governments are losing their high ground. They must stop.
As in the Cold War, I would give an allowance for the West to still be preferable (modulo strict rights record) if they actually muster some sort of power to confront tyranny. But if the rulers only want cheap rhetoric wins, no.
It's not literally the same of course. But you should wonder, how much of the difference is due just differences in how much they need to do?
If South American dictatorships could have their way with less blood and less noise, don't you think they would prefer that?
I'm reminded of a tragicomic recent admission from Nate Silver of 538 fame. He said Disney almost never interfered in their editorial process, as if that was a good thing. What that really meant, after all, was that Disney was perfectly willing to interfere in their editorial process, but almost never felt the need to. (As you would expect. I mean, why would Disney care about political polling?)
Could it similarly be that the UK government is perfectly willing to engage in brutal political suppression, but rarely has a need to? In that case maybe people are right to sound the alarm even though we haven't reached South American dictatorship levels yet.
I mean, given that is hasn't worked and hundreds of people have continued to stand up and be arrested for supporting Palestine Action, I'd say that's a no?
It hasn't worked in changing policy, or meaningfully changing who's in charge. Currently the government is getting its way with this sufficient level of brutality.
I think it's likely they will get still more scared that they won't, and ramp up the brutality accordingly.
The path forward is clear: Reform gets into power, builds their own paramilitary "immigration enforcement" groups a la ICE, and you get the occasional summary execution in the streets, along with arrests based on UKs unmatched surveillance system.
The people complaining probably live in the UK or are related to it somehow. Then it would make sense that they are more worried about authoritarianism in the UK rather than in South America.
And even if the man was wearing a proper "Palestine Action" shirt that'd still be pretty concerning. It is an insane stretch to say that wearing a shirt represents a matter for police action. How far the world has moved on from when the UK could be considered a forward-thinking bastion of liberalism.
The people complaining were American AFAICT and weren’t worried by either, they were just drawing hyperbolic equivalences between suppression of speech and state orchestrated mass kidnapping and murder.
If we're talking about the Palestine Action shirt, Israel is defending against accusations [0] that they are genocidal. The police action of the UK seems like it could be pretty easily construed as suppression of speech in support of state orchestrated mass kidnapping and murder on a concerning scale.
Whatever is happening in SA might be as bad, I suppose, but I don't speak Spanish or have any family connection there so I'm not going to look it up. Although if they're genocidal then they should stop too, should that need to be said.
The example given was of a man in a “Plasticine Action” t-shirt, with the poster saying how that man was “disappeared” by the British state when he was briefly arrested and released.
If you’re not aware of the history of people being disappeared by states such as Chile under Pinochet, or more broadly what it means for a state to disappear someone, that’s kinda on you.
Either way these are not equivalent actions.
Yes, it’s suppression of free speech in a chilling manner. I hate it. No, it’s not the same as suppressing that speech by taking someone and holding them in a secret prison for years and/or killing them.
And one thing Assange used to say over and over again, was that he was inspired by government attempts to suppress WikiLeaks releases, because that was evidence that they feared the information in them could actually change things. This is pretty much also the main thesis of Chomsky, and many other western dissidents (and some others too, e.g. Ai Weiwei): our leaders are as unaccountable and willing to use brutality as any dictatorship, they just have less reason to.
Call me when the UK government brings the machine guns and starts slaughtering 40k Palestine Action protestors and I promise to agree it's all the same
I'll make it easier for you:
wake me up when the UK government slaughters 1% the amount of the protestors the Iranian government just did in two days.
400 protestors shot by machine guns mounted on SUVs in London.
That just might be approaching slippery slope territory to the current Iranian actions.
Currently I believe we are at zero protestors casually shot on the streets of the UK, so I fail to see the equivalency
Bad as the Iranian regime is, we know that foreign governments are actively working for regime change/collapse in Iran (Mossad boasted in public about being with the protesters on the ground in Iran, whether that's true or not it seems like a statement intended to make things worse). So maybe be extra careful where you source those death numbers claims.
UK is not, and will not be in the situation Iran is in for the foreseeable future. There will not be several powerful countries, some widely hated in UK and openly preferring a UK in smoking ruins to democratic government in the UK, calling for revolution there (although don't get me wrong, UK too could totally could use a revolution). UK has nuclear weapons. UK has a world-class surveillance apparatus, and doesn't have to contend with the cynical people running it getting regularly murdered or bought out by more powerful actors.
What all this means - and this has been the core message of just about all dissidents in western countries for decades - is that the people with control in the UK don't have to gun down hundreds (or tens of thousands, if you believe the colored reports) in the streets to cling to power. If it was their best option, they might.
Sure, and his treatment has been awful in so many ways.
I'm honestly not trying to defend any action by any state in this thread, I'm not trying to say that the UK is better than any other state. I'm not trying to make any point at all beyond using a specific example in agreeing with the comments above mine that "Everything is the same and comparable never mind how hyperbolic."
But it seems to be construed as if I am, no matter how much I agree that the actions we're talking about are terrible. People come back and tell me the UK is bad and I should feel bad for defending it. I know right! And if I was I would!
I must admit I find the whole thing very frustrating.
The problem is you have to fight for these things every generation.
It's a mistake to take things like trial by jury, open justice ( not secret courts ), non-arbitrary detention, even regular elections for granted.
I totally agree with you that the UK is not Iran and there is too much hyperbole - but at the same time the current government is trying to criminalise legitimate protest, cancelling elections and trying to remove trial by jury for a substantial set of things ( the ultimate protection against an authoritarian state ).
As an example, it's very telling that the government ensured that in all the Assange legal proceedings it never went before a jury.
The current government creating all these precedents, in the shadow of the prospect of a potential Reform government is something I think we should all be concerned about.
Tell me about it, that Jury thing in particular was shocking to hear, that they’re considering throwing aside an ancient right in the name of expediency and clearing a backlog, as if it was a minor detail and not the basis of the system of justice.
Especially since there is no evidence that it's the presence of juries is the cause of the backlog.
The idea that the state can deprive you of your freedom for a sentence likely to be less than 3 years without the chance to be tried before you peers, is worrying.
Note is was six months before Nov 2024, it's 12 months now and they are looking to extend to 3 years! ( or more - given the word: likely ).
Juries are not an administrative inconvenience or process inefficiency.
The current legal reform seems to be operating on the assumption that the defendent is guilty - rather thana resumption of innocence.
Better to let the guilty to go free, than imprison the innocent.
I mean, you bought up an example of a man being dragged off the streets of the UK for (1) trying to express support for playdough and (2) being suspected of undermining support for genocide.
I have relatives in the UK, right now. And after this conversation I'm now more concerned for them than I was this morning, and I can make some educated guesses about why ol' mate didn't want to talk to you about Pinochet, who Wikipedia suggests died 20 years ago. Sounds like something is going on in the UK right now.
I mean, seriously, I have left-wing family members who might be travelling to the UK this year. Is there some sort of guide to what political t-shirts will get them arrested?
This feels disingenuous on your part now and is in fact exhibiting the exact problem brought up in the thread.
You’re not being asked to feel better about the UK! If you didn’t know about this stuff and you feel worse about the UK, good, you probably should!
But you are being asked to see a difference in degree between:
Someone speaks out about human rights abuses and murder sanctioned by the state, and is arrested, then later released with an apology.
Someone speaks out about human rights abuses and murder sanctioned by the state, and is arrested, their arrest is denied by the state and they turn up several years later in a mass grave.
You’re telling me those are the same thing?
> I mean, seriously, I have left-wing family members who might be travelling to the UK this year. Is there some sort of guide to what political t-shirts will get them arrested?
“Palestine Action” is currently a proscribed organisation. They are proscribed because some of them are alleged to have fucked with some fighter jets and done some other illegal direct action stuff.
So currently it’s illegal to show support for that specific group.
There are open court challenges to the whole situation, and many hundreds of people are awaiting trial for continuing to show support to the group after the proscription. The whole thing is a shitshow.
But you can (AFAICT) support Palestine and Palestinian people as much as you like, you’re just not allowed to wave “Palestine Action” flags or t-shirts around.
Everything is the same and comparable never mind how hyperbolic. Doubt it? be showered with cherry picked micro facts that on the surface are similar.
This rests on the fact that in order to establish a big picture you have to take small facts and agree on the big picture, and that leap from small and verifiable to large and analytic is the place you can inject faith and emotion