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.
It’s really weird to watch.
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.
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.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa's_genocide_case_a...
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.
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?
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.
Sure. Though in the UK I give you Julian Assange - 5 years in BellMarsh, mostly in total isolation as if he was some major threat.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
and that's why it is efficient propaganda
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 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.
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.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/oct/11/manchester-man-ja...
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.
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.
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.
It still stinks through and through of course.
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.
I can't do anything about iran, i don't live there, neither does anyone else commenting here it seems... but many of us do live in EU, and are bothered by EU doing the same thing as iran, even if it's on a smaller scale (for now). You can't support censorship at home and then act outraged when someone else just implements more of it... even though some do, as long as the censored things are the things they personally don't like.
To be fair, i'm more worried about UK, since it's a "test ground" to see how things work before the bad thing are implemented elsewhere, but either way, in my small country we have a saying, that "people should first sweep infront of their own doorways", and yeah, EU and our censorship is my doorway in this case.
TLDR: if we're bothered by internet censorship, we should first stop at 'at home'.
Sure EU has some fkn horrible sides to it, such as the anonymous vote to get big stuff through when a majority should be enough as democracy depicts, but currently 2 states out of all EU states can block the big decisions...
You also don’t live in the United States, or in Israel or Palestine but folks tend to forget that it seems.
But you can do something anyway which is to be aware of the atrocities committed by Iran’s regime, make sure your government is aware of your opinion, you can protest outside the Iranian embassy in your country, help Iranian dissidents, help Iranians find sneaky ways to get internet access, &c.
I’m not expecting anyone to do those things but I find this “I don’t live there” argument continue to creep up whenever it comes to Iran but it never enters conversation when it comes to specific other countries.
> TLDR: if we're bothered by internet censorship, we should first stop at 'at home'.
Sure but you don’t have to focus on one issue at a time. Honestly resorting Internet access in Iran is probably more important than whatever rules and things the EU is implementing because in Iran people are actually dying and you can always change the EU rules back through democratic processes.
On the other hand, there are many people from EU here who need to hear it, that EU is doing the same as iran... censoring websites and more (IDs, chat control,...). Yes, maybe not at the same level, less sites are censored here, but censorship is still censorship, and the trend is going towards more control and more censorship.
United states, israel (and palestine), etc. are different. Are we bothered by what israel is doing in palestine? Yes! (some of us). Can we actually do something about it? Sure... the germans can tell their government to stop selling weapons to israel [0], we can implement sanctions, tarrifs, etc. This is something that we can do "at home", something that can make some change. We did that for russia, we did that for iran, north korea etc (at various times and various levels), but we did something. We didn't really do that (at least not at scale) for isreal. US is doing that to us (EU) with tarrifs every two weeks, but we didn't really properly respond, even under the threat of an invasion on greenland.
Yes, restricted internet in iran is bad, but we can't stop it. Sadly, changing back EU rules is similarly hard to do, which again, is something that should be fixed, by us, at home.
[0] https://www.dw.com/en/war-in-gaza-germany-supplies-30-of-isr...
(Just a reminder that the above is what I responded to)
> But what can you do for iran?
You can encourage your governments to take action against Iran as well. Further sanctions, diplomatic pressure, providing support to the Iranian people, &c. In my case as an American I am encouraging my government to take the toughest action possible to stop Iran. Much of the blood of dead Palestinians can be placed at their feet too since they arm and support Hezbollah and Hamas who are doing what they can to keep killing people and keep the conflict active.
Just because you personally don't know what can be done doesn't mean something can't be done, and at a minimum you can encourage your government to continue to do the things it's already doing. You don't have to know what can be done, you can leave that up to others while demanding that the Iranian regime halt its indiscriminate mass murder of Iranian civilians before they make the number of people killed in Gaza look like a warmup.
Not living in Iran doesn't mean you (an EU citizen I presume) can't do anything about the actions of that regime. It's simply not a valid argument.