If this morning's Times is correct then we about to see yet another tiny step forward in our ever increasing sleepwalk into an Orwellian state. According to their front page story, there are plans, as part of information sharing across Whitehall for local authority official to be issued guidelines about report people to the Police who they suspect might commit an offence.
It's a cliche to talk about the Thought Police, but at some point the dark dystopian fictional world of Airstrip One in 1984 will become a reality for us all without, so it seems, many of us seeing it coming. There is something scarily Stasi-esque about building a society where people are encouraged to report other people to the Police because they "think" they're a bit dodgy.
With the rise of doublespeak, or what is commonly known as "political correctness", we have already begun the journey of reshaping our language along those lines which fit an orthodoxy of "acceptability". We have outlaw3ed the use of certain words, and in some cases in fact, simple using them could already see you arrested.
To be arrested for speaking your mind, is to be arrested for thinking. And being arrested for thinking can only ever be called Thought Crime. Now with these new plans, should they come to fruition, we will not only have our thought limited through what we say, but we could potentially see our action limited but what someone thinks we might do based upon what we say.
The supporters of such changes will, as ever, argue for them on the basis of their supposed "benefit". The cultural questions about the metamorphosis of language and the introduction of orthodoxy, along with the political arguments about the pervasive nature of the state apparatus will be dismissed as mere paranoia. "Do you really think [insert politician here] would use it in that way?" will be the argument. The response should be straight forward as this.
It is not relevant whether we think a particularly politician or Government might use such changes in a negative way. What is relevant is that we cannot guarantee that someone with the desire to use such change will not find a way of seizing power. I don't deny that I might sound melodramatic, however the assault on language, thought and these changes to the apparatus of state power that are going on really aren't something we should simply shrug off.
9 comments:
You've hit several nails firmly on the head here! Perhaps the next step is that we all inform on each other, just if we are suspicious you understand. I could build a file on my neighbours and hand it in each week, wouldn't that be great - yeah right. It says a lot about the view of society that is held by this government. Rather than being that modern, sharing society Blair talked of creating, it is one that needs monitoring, controlling and oppressing. When even the police say we are being watched too much you know something is wrong. And another thing, the police get all this information, it takes them hours to respond to a crime in progress, how will they respond to the suspicion a crime may be committed at some time in the future? 1984 is mild perhaps, I think East Germany under Stalinism is a closer paradigm
Well said Dizzy.
It's a bit of a puzzle to me how this state of affairs has come to pass. My guess is that forty or fifty years ago politicians of all persuasions would be jumping on this as an outrage. Why have things changed.
I posit it's because 'ends' are now allowed to justify means which in turn is a reflection of the 'relativity thinking' that has followed the abandonment of religion.
I wish the Tories would set out some basic principles. One gets the impression that the only principle the leadership believes in is 'Follow the Focus Group'.
Have you heard those radio ads for the "shop a person who might be a terrorist" hotline??
I agree with your point but what will the police actually do with this info? They can barely cope with actual crime never mind thought crime.
Mr D
Not sure if I sent you this, or you've seen it.
http://haveringhavers.blogspot.com/2007/05/big-brother-is-watching-us.html
Our local council taking "a holistic view of their citizen data'
It began with "political correctness", which is a soft, manipulative way of saying "thought fascism". For the last 10 years or so, the British have been required to think, or pretend to think, as the government has ordered.
That is why the clear-headed public failed to nip mass immigration in the bud. "Racism", which is a thought crime. Under the same blanket hides "Islamophobia". If you have some knowledge of islam, you know that it is an aggressive "religion", but you are required to reject your own knowledge and toe the line that aggressive islam is practised only by "a tiny minority".
The EU has been "good for Britain". Immediately after 7/7, Tony Blair went on TV not to offer his condolences to the families of the dead and the maimed, but to reprimand the British for any thoughts they might have that islam was the driving force behind this massive crime.
Slappers on council estates living on benefits, unmarried and with four or five children by four or five different men who are long gone are "a different kind of family".
It sounds silly, but I intuited all this early from watching Tony Blair, who is insane. I left - because I feared that one day it may be too late and you might have to apply for a licence, easily refused, to emigrate, and observed from afar.
I was chilled by the control Alastair Campbell had over the press for the first five years of the Blair putsch against democracy. By the time he'd left, newspaper editors were too cowed to run the ridiculous Mo cartoons, under the guise of being "mature", whereas less politically correct countries like France, Germany, Denmark, Jordan and Mexico ran them. But not the country with "the freest press in the world".
As the left always does, Blair had an army of snoops and apparachiks in council offices up and down the country, and busybodies keen to rack up points with the apparachiks. Better cars,better clothes and better products in the supermarket,but under Blair, Eastern Europe came to Britain.
Have you noticed how, during Brown's campaign not to be elected, various old stories about opponents came out to discredit them? That's how it will work between ordinary citizens too. As long as you get along with Joe next door, all will be well. One day he thinks you are looking lustfully at his wife and you get a knock on the door in the middle of the night because he denounced you for something. In Stalin's time, you rented a room as a lodger and then denounced the landlord to get the whole apartment. This won't just change the relation between state and citizen (which should be one of total distrust on the citizen's part anyway). It will change relations between citizen and citizen, neighbour and neighbour, friend and friend.
Well said, Tom Paine!!
And further to my last post, along the same Staziesque lines, at some point, you will not be able to emigrate without going through a lengthy process for "an emigration visa". The reason will be, they need revenue producers in Britain to support the parasite sector.
Even if you finally get your permit, they won't let you take all your money with you. (It'll be safe in Britain and we will be paying you 5% interest, so nothing to worry about.) And if Dave gets in - which he won't - it won't be any different (which is why he won't get in, of course).
ring ring ring ring hello id like to
report a crime... gordon brown stole my pension,
Post a Comment