European Politics Thread.

[PELHAM 10]

Did you list any? I am simply saying that the comparative numbers of both categories of those people are vastly outweighed by the far right and there isn't really anything to connect Communism (particularly of the Stalinist strand) to the left or far left. Anarchists, by their very definition, cannot be categorised in this way too.

Are your personal stories based in the UK? I can't really relate to those stories, none are related to left wing politics in the UK, sadly. PM sent about the 2nd.

The far right and far left have the same problems with the world. They can't accept differences and only mix with people who think the same way they do, so it gets reinforced. Both groups generate untruthful propaganda and share a similar paranoia about being opressed by the other, to the extent where their lives are consumed with activities designed to destroy the other. They also hate everyone in the middle ground (the majority) and you will frequently notice they refer to them with degrading terminology.

Both aim to achieve strong government control of people and their daily lives. Both have strong anti-government views, believing that government is working against the ordinary citizen. Both have an end goal of a perfect world utopia based on their ideology. It's two ends of the same personality disorder lol.

Yes all 3 examples I give occurred in the UK, examples of discrimination by people of far left wing ideology based on skin colour, nationality or religion.

So you say communism and anarchism are not far left ideologies??? Well thank you for letting us know lol.

[Baff1 0]

Anarchism is possible to describe closer to extreme right. I thought.

The absence of state.

Although in truth I don't think it fits well into either faction as people of all ideologies have anarchistic tendencies. A desire for revolution.

I think it better represents feelings of political disenfranchisement more than it does a strong association with one political ideology over another.

[PELHAM 10]

Anarchism is possible to describe closer to extreme right. I thought.

The absence of state.

Although in truth I don't think it fits well into either faction as people of all ideologies have anarchistic tendencies. A desire for revolution.

I think it better represents feelings of political disenfranchisement more than it does a strong association with one political ideology over another.

Mainstream thought has it firmly on the far left, the right is all about control and order, anarchy is the antithesis of that.

[Baff1 0]

No mate left wing is all about state control. Stalin. Mao.

One could hardly argue that communism was all about individual freedom.

Authoritarianism is part of all political ideologies.

Libertarianism is about freedom from state control and a smaller state is right wing philosophy. The belief that people organise themselves more efficiently if left to their own devices.

Libertarianism taken to it's extreme, is anarchy.

There are strong elements of this in right wing ideology.

On those "political spectrum" quiz thingies, you will note that the results graph has two scales, left and right and up and down.

Left and right for left wing and right wing, up and down for authoritarianism and liberartianism.

Edited March 26, 2012 by Baff1

[Prydain 1]

Anarchists can't be categorised because, by their very definition, they drop civics. Anarchism is the absence of politics because there would be no state in an anarchist world. It doesn't matter anyway, it isn't as if there are any Anarchists beyond the usual loon collection. I think you'd have to go back to the Spanish civil war to find anarchists with any numbers or power.

Communism is quite close to my head and has been all my life. George Orwell has always been a personal hero of mine and I have studied this quite a lot in relation to him. Communism is too broad a term in my opinion, there isn't a massive difference between how Trotsky and Stalin would have ruled and yet Trotsky is considered left-wing while Stalin is always considered to be far-right. Since left wing politics is usually just a movement towards egalitarianism or movement against anti-reactionarys I don't see how either can be considered left wing by anyone. How can Stalin's communism, an ideology based on repression of political, social and civil rights, be left wing? It is the very opposite. Communism can only be considered left wing when all of those rights are part of the particular strand of the ideology and the general acceptance of all proletariats cannot be passed off as truly inclusive of all colours and ethnicitys (tenants of the left), as the Stalinist USSR showed towards the Ukrainians.

[Baff1 0]

I have a different method of defining left and right wing. Since this is a democracy, I follow the patronage.

Essentially I boil it down to key political self intrests. We all vote for what's best for us.

So right wingers want to pay less tax because they identify themselves as benefiting less from where it is spent and left wingers want everyone to pay more tax because they identify themselves with benefitting from where it is spent.

So broadly speaking we expect those who are financed by the state to be left wing, and those who finance the state to be right wing.

The party politics then must patronise it's clientele.

So left wing parties make policies that redistribute wealth towards their target supporters, and right wing parties cut taxes to allow their target supporters to retain more of their wealth.

And this for me is the core political divide.

The old democracy classic. Patronage.

And all the rest is just bollocks and moralising to justify everyones own self-intrests above anothers.

Edited March 26, 2012 by Baff1

[mrcash2009 0]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745

Email and web use 'to be monitored' under new laws

The government will be able to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK under new legislation set to be announced soon.

But apparently its about terrorism, which its not, becuase that would suggest anyone is a potential terrorist, which they arent, so its simply a way to enforce less privacy online, imagine the blackmailing and use this information can have for official sources if you question them later on.

"What this is talking about doing is not focusing on terrorists or criminals, it's absolutely everybody's emails, phone calls, web access..." he told the BBC.

"All that's got to be recorded for two years and the government will be able to get at it with no by your leave from anybody."

No suprise this happens already, but not stored as such and an outright announcement of it. No wonder it was called the "Web".

Welcome UK to the stasi land.

[PELHAM 10]

I'm not really bothered as there isn't much they can do with it unless you are engaged in some high level crime or terrorism. They will only be looking at specific people, not everyone all at once, as the usual hysterics are trying to make out. All this law is for is requiring ISP's to give access and makes a legal arrangement out of something that has happened informally for years.

If this shuts down terrorists, criminal networks and hackers whats the problem? 99% of the population will never be affected by it.

Edited April 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[mrcash2009 0]

there isn't much they can do with it unless you are engaged in some high level crime or terrorism

And you have these stone cold facts to prove thats the case, and this will never spil over into other uses? You have that 100 percent?

If this shuts down terrorists

Of course opening this to everyone in a country clearly means that it will after all, they are EVERWHERE.

99% of the population will never be affected by it.

Umm, the fact it comes to light so openly for every man woman & child in the country automatically is an effect in its own right Pelham.

Did you ever see local councils using terror laws to snoop on tennants? There are so many elements of new open laws like this being used in "other" ways not directly what it was badged for, what you dont realise Pelham is your seeing the sugar coated front end element, wait a few years mate, your grandkids will love it.

People will be uttering the age old words of "nothing to hide nothing to worry about" until they suddenly have the penny drop, it might not be now, but it will come in time.

Edited April 1, 2012 by mrcash2009

[Tonci87 163]

And you have these stone cold facts to prove thats the case, and this will never spil over into other uses? You have that 100 percent?

Of course opening this to everyone in a country clearly means that it will after all, they are EVERWHERE.

Umm, the fact it comes to light so openly for every man woman & child in the country automatically is an effect in its own right Pelham.

Did you ever see local councils using terror laws to snoop on tennants? There are so many elements of new open laws like this being used in "other" ways not directly what it was badged for, what you dont realise Pelham is your seeing the sugar coated front end element, wait a few years mate, your grandkids will love it.

People will be uttering the age old words of "nothing to hide nothing to worry about" until they suddenly have the penny drop, it might not be now, but it will come in time.

Exactly. Some people don´t seem to think ahead. You have to think where this will bring the UK in the future.

[PELHAM 10]

Some people also have very vivid imaginations lol

This law is only relevant between 2 entities - The Security Services and ISPs so it can't spread to local government. So you got that wrong. You don't know how the law works or how government is organised, that is probably why you are so confused? I do realise other laws were misused but they have been repealed or changed so nothing is set in stone. I and no one I know was ever stopped and questioned, I understand a few people hoping to post something on YouTube engineered trouble for themselves.

GCHQ don't have the resources or interest to read everyones email. They are looking for major security threats to the nation, nothing else.

They have requested this apply to all citizens because they a) don't have a complete list and b) don't want to compromise investigations by handing lists of names to ISP's.

I really don't give a shit about anyone following my internet habits, reading my email, opening my post because they will never find anything illegal.

I hope this makes life much more difficult for thoase engaged in illegal activity and terrorism and I feel nothing for them. If this means that sometime in the future I can get on a plane and go on holiday without standing in a line for an hour and removing my belt and shoes I will be perfectly happy.

RE David Davis - he is a very sad, bitter man who had his political carrer ended a few years ago after poorly run leadership campaign . He will say anything to get revenge on his political enemies (much like gorgeous George Galloway).

Edited April 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[Tonci87 163]

Some people also have very vivid imaginations lol

This law is only relevant between 2 entities - The Security Services and ISPs so it can't spread to local government. So you got that wrong. You don't know how the law works or how government is organised, that is probably why you are so confused? I do realise other laws were misused but they have been repealed or changed so nothing is set in stone. I and no one I know was ever stopped and questioned, I understand a few people hoping to post something on YouTube engineered trouble for themselves.

GCHQ don't have the resources or interest to read everyones email. They are looking for major security threats to the nation, nothing else.

They have requested this apply to all citizens because they a) don't have a complete list and b) don't want to compromise investigations by handing lists of names to ISP's.

I really don't give a shit about anyone following my internet habits, reading my email, opening my post because they will never find anything illegal.

I hope this makes life much more difficult for thoase engaged in illegal activity and terrorism and I feel nothing for them. If this means that sometime in the future I can get on a plane and go on holiday without standing in a line for an hour and removing my belt and shoes I will be perfectly happy.

RE David Davis - he is a very sad, bitter man who had his political carrer ended a few years ago after poorly run leadership campaign . He will say anything to get revenge on his political enemies (much like gorgeous George Galloway).

Do you mind if the government installs a camera in your apartment? Why not, they won´t find anything illegal, won´t they?

[PELHAM 10]

Do you mind if the government installs a camera in your apartment? Why not, they won´t find anything illegal, won´t they?

lol That is not what this is. Put an extra layer on your tinfoil hat. They will only ever monitor a few hundred people at a time, those suspected of terrorism and large scale crime. If something bad happens or a major crime is committed, the records and this ability may help to solve it more quickly. I really don't have a probem with it. The people blustering about this in the press are simply using it for their own political agendas and careers.

[Tonci87 163]

lol That is not what this is. Put an extra layer on your tinfoil hat. They will only ever monitor a few hundred people at a time, those suspected of terrorism and large scale crime. If something bad happens or a major crime is committed, the records and this ability may help to solve it more quickly. I really don't have a probem with it. The people blustering about this in the press are simply using it for their own political agendas and careers.

Its about where you draw the line. A camera in your apartment would be to much for you, right? But it won´t bother you if they read your mails? You do realize that governments are about to make more and more laws that allow them to controll their citizens, right? Just take a look at was was allowed 20 years ago and compare it to today´s standarts. This trend will continue. Our Grandchildren might actuall have a camera in their apartment, to protect them against thieves of course...

[NoRailgunner 0]

Naive people do like to follow someone who promise them "peace and comfy living" even if their freedom will be just a little bit more or fully restricted/observed. Of course no one ever was or is or will be interested in marketing/advertisement and product placement or selling personal data. C'mon have a little bit more trust in your politics, those important economical lobbies and of course the bureaucracy - they all will surely do all they can to save or expand their own power. That is just fair and vital to how the world works! Isn't it easier to live in a world that is painted/preset just in black and white? ;)

[mrcash2009 0]

As regards cameras in your apartment, just go out and purchase the latest smart TV:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2117493/Samsungs-latest-TV-sets-built-cameras-spark-concerns.html

They make my skin crawl, they come with a nice built in mic too & face recognition (fun for the family & loaded with facebook). Just package it under "entertainment" .. government not included, DIY surveillance.

If some years back the government said:

"we are setting up a website for online profiles for individuals so it can be monitored, you all need to be on our digital network, you all need a microphone in your home and a camera. Also we will set up a government package where you internet and phone is under one network. We will supply you with a mobile device that you carry at all times also connected to such network and monitor your location, we will also be able to monitor all of this collectively and store the data for 2 years".

People would have rioted or shit themselves ... but, its carefully introduced slowly under entertainment, seemingly all separate and all under your own free will.

Not so much a requirement for a tin foil hat, just ignorance or turning a blind eye, or simply ill informed.

**back on topic**

Sorry Pelham but your a tad naive just to keep things so boxed in about this that the net would not widen later on once its implemented and built upon, you dont need an imagination, just look around. Im not saying that currently your wrong, what I am saying is "once its implemented it will be broadened out".

I really don't give a shit about anyone following my internet habits, reading my email, opening my post because they will never find anything illegal.

Again the "nothing to hide nothing to worry about" mantra, its old hat and doesn't quite fit what's happening of late. Ever understood privacy? Ever understood general principle. That one statement you have made is numero uno why things will get more tightened, because you dont give a shit, and that EXACTLY how you are supposed to react to it. The problem is it wont be your lifetime that gets fucked over with this, it will be later generations when they get the full brunt of its implementation among other things, oh so very selfishly & simplisticly put Pelham. BTW you care to forget your phone calls and SMS.

You also seem to miss the fact that this gives a green light to anyone "anyway" not, we need to investigate this and then take such steps, its simply blanket use effecting the majority to be monitored even they have done sod all as a rule of thumb. And unless your work with such agencies, have clearance on the data storage servers, actual work in the department creating such storage and organisation of it, I will take your point with a pinch of salt.

If this means that sometime in the future I can get on a plane and go on holiday without standing in a line for an hour and removing my belt and shoes I will be perfectly happy.

Keep dreaming. This will stay the same & more xray scanners, that will then end up on coach and bus/train terminals later, and guess what, no terror found all the time and everyone shafted and still your data is then monitored when your not travelling or being inconvenienced. Also you can pay a fast track fee to beat the qeues ... that should tell you something.

Also you stated and I understand they can do this type of procedure you mention (getting intel and then taking steps to tap phone, check email text and such) already, and as you know this and so do I, plus agencies are already set up to track and monitor terrorist activity with all kinds of algorithm software, we get told high and low level threats all year round (so who knows this exactly enough to let the public know) .............. so, why then does it need to be branched out open house to anyone in the UK? I dont see any more or less terrorists running a mock.

Let me step out on a limb and say that its about setting up this system because allot of descent will happen in the future about many world subjects rolling out right now.

Edited April 2, 2012 by mrcash2009

[onlyrazor 11]

As JC Denton said: "Some people just don't understand the dangers of indiscriminate surveillance."

[batto 17]

They will only ever monitor a few hundred people at a time

Dude, it's 21th century. "They" will be looking at results of a query from complex cybernetic systems.

lol That is not what this is. Put an extra layer on your tinfoil hat. They will only ever monitor a few hundred people at a time, those suspected of terrorism and large scale crime. If something bad happens or a major crime is committed, the records and this ability may help to solve it more quickly. I really don't have a probem with it. The people blustering about this in the press are simply using it for their own political agendas and careers.

Anyway this really looks like a troll fail. I'm starting to think that PEHALM is just old school master troll having fun on BIS forums.

[PELHAM 10]

Anyway this really looks like a troll fail. I'm starting to think that PEHALM is just old school master troll having fun on BIS forums.

I'm only airing my opinions just like anyone else, I didn't start this thread, I am reacting to it. I could call you many names "dude" but it would be an infraction under rule #1 wouldn't it?

I am well aware the security services trawl communications networks looking for key words. They only look in detail at specific targets though. Start up google earth and count the number of car parking spaces at GCHQ and work out yourself how many people they can study in detail. It is preposterous to think that there is someone sitting in a room somewhere reading your emails.

What is it that you get up to that you're so sensitive about revealing anyway? Say they find your summer holiday photos of you up a mountainside raping a sheep. GCHQ are not in the slightest bit interested in your sexual habits, it's not a national security issue. The computers wouldn't flag it and even if some operative saw it he would giggle for 5 mins and move on.

[Tonci87 163]

Well I don´t want my emails being read by anyone, be it a computer or a operator. Why? Because they are mine! It´s called privacy.

[batto 17]

I could call you many names "dude" but it would be an infraction under rule #1 wouldn't it?

Let's respect the rules man!

I am well aware the security services trawl communications networks looking for key words.

You're aware of so many things that I doubt that you go deeper than some stories on news.

They only look in detail at specific targets though.

How can you know? Before you start posting URLs, how can you know they're not lying? And who are they?

Start up google earth and count the number of car parking spaces at GCHQ and work out yourself how many people they can study in detail.

That's year 2012 baby.

It is preposterous to think that there is someone sitting in a room somewhere reading your emails.

It is very naive if You think opposite.

What is it that you get up to that you're so sensitive about revealing anyway? Say they find your summer holiday photos of you up a mountainside raping a sheep. GCHQ are not in the slightest bit interested in your sexual habits, it's not a national security issue. The computers wouldn't flag it and even if some operative saw it he would giggle for 5 mins and move on.

Google earth is fine. You can look, they (who?) can look. Monitoring your home is not OK beacuse only they can look. My mindflow: Governments are composed of humans. They are minority compared to whole nation. They cooperate and try to have nice life and remain in power (because it's good). They pass new laws for whole nation. Some of us (let's say majority) may not like some laws. They pass your favourite Big Brother and SOMEONE cooperating them will be in charge of monitoring life of some people opposing some laws. They use legal ways to get these people from their way... And all this will be to maintain peace & order... not so different from 1984. Sounds like I'm crazy but hey, it's totally possible dude, isn't it? And it's not for stopping terrorist but just a will of some minority...

EDIT: Well, Google earth is not so fine, but cameras at home are worse.

EDIT2: I see I'm writing non-sense. It's inevitable. Only AI or aliens can save us.

Edited April 2, 2012 by batto

[mrcash2009 0]

What is it that you get up to that you're so sensitive about revealing anyway?

Your not quite getting this Pelham are you ? :confused:

If thats your logic, then I want to know everything about you please and all of your records, as you are such an open chap that can do no wrong. Point is, if you have done NOTHING WRONG then you shouldn't be subject to it, we already have things in place for those dodgy typed highlighted or flagged up and then investigated off the back of it, your falling for media spin and advertising. I mean how unsafe must you feel in order to not batter an eyelid of this thing to make you safe?

It is preposterous to think that there is someone sitting in a room somewhere reading your emails.

It is, becuase thats what you said, which just shows how you view it.

One thing you are not taking into account is the fact that privatisation and private bid contracts are flying around all the time currently in the UK. DVLA have been selling off data, I cant tell you the amount of third parties just itching to get contracts and back handers for advertising and all manner of shit you can throw at the data which will be hot property. We are in an econimic depression (yes depression) so money from this is "handy". You are failing to see any of that, and simply look at you as the individual and your emails with nothing to hide nothing to worry about justifications. Thats tip of the iceberg.

Yet ironicly we are all up in arms at news papers and hacking scandals!? Crazy shit it realy is.

Corruption and back handers, and centralising of agencies and data sharing is rife, its not one security firm looking for the bogey man as its made out to be, that's the media spoon fed version.

Low and behold they are going to use "Social Networking" as a key place to start storing the data longer like ISP's do, all part of its design.

Also how can you justify this is ok, by using examples of already implemented things such as google who are just as bad? Remember the Wifi scanning when they were trawling the streets with the google earth vans? "these are just as bad but that exists, so the new thing that adds to it is ok"?

Edited April 2, 2012 by mrcash2009

[PELHAM 10]

@one_man_clan lol lets respect the rules - you broke them twice in your last post! As for the rest, no logic, no reasoning, no understanding, very little thought.

I will give you 1 example:

Email statistics 2009:

90 trillion – The number of emails sent on the Internet in 2009.

247 billion – Average number of email messages per day.

1.4 billion – The number of email users worldwide.

100 million – New email users since the year before.

3 billion - emails sent in the UK every day.

GCHQ employs around 6000 staff.

Lets be very generous and say GCHQ have 2,000 analysts ready to work on reading everyone's emails, how long would it take them to read all the email sent in a single day @60secs per email?

3 billion minutes

/60 = 50 million hours

/24 = 2083333.33 days

/2000 people = 1041.66 days

Lets cut that further and say we put it through a spam filter and remove 80%.

208.33 days to read 20%.

Lets put that number through further filters so we are dealing with known suspects and emails containing suspicious sentences, names and key words call it 1%.

10.42 days for 2000 people, working 24hours a day, to read just 1% of the emails sent in the UK each day. And that is just email, never mind phonecalls, forums, blogs, skype etc etc. The numbers are huge!

Now you realise why I find this ridiculous nonsense that is spread around about the government spying on your email so laughable. They don't have the capability to do anything but target a small number of people. Computers can filter it but you need people to do a final analysis and make a judgement. They aren't spying on everyone - it isn't possible.

See? Put some logical thought behind it and you realise just what crap some of these people are talking.

[Tonci87 163]

Eiterh you are a troll or you don´t understand the most basic principels. It doesn´t matter if one of them actually reads my E-mails, that they have the means to do so is enough to upset me.

[mrcash2009 0]

Ok Pelham, if this is the case, and it cant be done, then why try to inform the public of this to go ahead, and why bother to implement? Are you saying now its an exaggeration? If so is it a scare tactic? You simply focus on the email aspect, nothing else.

See? Put some logical thought behind it and you realise just what crap some of these people are talking.

Your speaking of the one article and the political gain aspect, check the news and elsewhere. If you think I thought they can do all of this all the time, you have me wrong, what Im saying is data being stored isnt hard to do, mining it later isnt either, live scanning is what you are referring to mainly is why it would be stored for longer and directly more accessible to the agencies (and whoever else at the highest bidder?). So if it cant be done and is all an exaggeration your not speak about the "storage" side. And thats what I refer too.

Edited April 2, 2012 by mrcash2009