Most active commenters
  • johnisgood(6)
  • labster(3)

←back to thread

235 points nickcotter | 14 comments | | HN request time: 0.616s | source | bottom
Show context
mesk ◴[] No.43514243[source]
USA, the land of unlimited possibilities...of how to get detained without a process...for expressing opinions...by the government repating that we have finally free speach and the dark ages are gone...while revisiting history to avoid dangerous words such as a 'women'...

And I've thought our wana-be-authorian politicians are greates idiots of all, but there seems to be running some kind of global world competion to find them and let them ruin their countries.

replies(3): >>43514291 #>>43514614 #>>43514688 #
1. johnisgood ◴[] No.43514614[source]
Most of what you said applies to the UK as well, for what it's worth.
replies(3): >>43514635 #>>43514647 #>>43515878 #
2. eterm ◴[] No.43514635[source]
It really doesn't, that's Fox news level of propaganda.

Does the UK have an issue with over-policing of twitter? Absolutely it does.

Are the tightening of protest laws concerning? Yes, very much so.

But it's nothing like the rhetoric and destruction of due process happening in the USA.

replies(1): >>43514907 #
3. sofixa ◴[] No.43514647[source]
Does it now, dear whatabouter?

People are getting arrested and deported with no due process for expressing opinions? The UK government is rewriting history to remove women and gays?

No, you're just confusing the existence of hate crimes in UK law, and maybe the dumb migrant detention in Rwanda scheme (which has since been cancelled), both of which have due process, are public, and ridiculous to compare.

replies(1): >>43514692 #
4. johnisgood ◴[] No.43514692[source]
You missed the first word of my comment.

Additionally, yeah there have been "social media offenses" in the recent years. Individuals have been arrested for comments made on social media platforms. Try it out. Communications Act 2003 come to mind.

Are people not entitled to lawyers in the US?

In any case, there is authority overreach in both countries (and more).

5. marcuschong ◴[] No.43515878[source]
While there is legitimate debate over how authoritarian some policies in Australia or the UK might be in the past few years, these measures operate within established legal frameworks, with judicial oversight and public scrutiny. Even if you view them as overly restrictive, they don't stem from a single "contrarian" movement with a coordinated political agenda. Moreover, neither government is rewriting history to erase specific groups. The fact that hate-speech or migration laws exist doesn’t equate to people being arrested or deported without due process, nor does it imply some monolithic campaign to censor or remove entire populations from the record.
replies(1): >>43516181 #
6. johnisgood ◴[] No.43516181[source]
You are right, the UK adores mass migration, look around larger cities, such as London or Birmingham. :)
replies(2): >>43518861 #>>43518884 #
7. labster ◴[] No.43518861{3}[source]
If the UK didn’t want immigrants, they shouldn’t have colonized half the world and took their stuff
replies(1): >>43518868 #
8. tim333 ◴[] No.43518884{3}[source]
It's complicated. Most traditional Brits don't want that but a lot of the asians are UK citizens and bring in brides / grooms from asia to marry so the numbers double roughly each generation.

Maybe as India gets richer and the UK economy flatlines they'll stop doing that.

replies(1): >>43545459 #
9. lizmat ◴[] No.43519645{5}[source]
Everybody is entitled to their opinion, whether they'd be Raku developers or not.
replies(2): >>43520130 #>>43521925 #
10. labster ◴[] No.43520130{6}[source]
Hi Liz!

Looks like it’s time to update my profile, sadly I’m doing more PHP and Lua these days (wish it was Raku, it’s much better, but that’s how it goes)

11. johnisgood ◴[] No.43521925{6}[source]
They are, and I am entitled to not associate with them in any way, and tell others to do the same, for this specific comment alone. It says a lot about his views. Like seriously, because the UK a long time tried to conquer parts of the world, mass migration to the UK today is somehow OK? Slavery should be OK, too, according to him, then, since all races have been enslaved at some point in time of history. It is extremely poor reasoning, in poor taste. You should know better.
replies(1): >>43522565 #
12. labster ◴[] No.43522565{7}[source]
My comment made zero moral judgements. History has consequences. Spreading the English language to over a billion people while enriching Britain means a lot of people will want to live in a rich place where they can speak the language, for generations to come. Whether immigration is good or bad is kind of irrelevant to the argument.
replies(1): >>43545469 #
13. johnisgood ◴[] No.43545459{4}[source]
Indians are definitely are issue, but so are the influx of people from Africa. It is worth looking at videos of these cities and how much they have changed over the course of years because of immigration. The city is trashed, quite literally. Trash everywhere you go.
14. johnisgood ◴[] No.43545469{8}[source]
You appealed to what "UK" did in the past, though.

Same thing applies to slavery, then, since every race has been enslaved before. Would you say slavery is OK, too, considering it has been common practice by then by race or nationality X?