Is 4chan the perfect Pirate Bay poster child to justify wider UK site-blocking?

I genuinely do not understand where how the idea of building a total surveillance police state, where all speech is monitored, can even as much as seriously be considered by an allegedly pro-democracy, pro-human rights government, much less make it into law.

Also:

Step 1: Build mass surveillance to prevent the 'bad guys' from coming into political power (its ok, we're the good guys).

Step 2: Your political opponents capitalize on your genuinely horrific overreach, and legitimize themselves in the eyes of the public as fighting against tyranny (unfortunately for you they do have a point). They promise to dismantle the system if coming to power.

Step 3: They get elected.

Step 4: They don't dismantle the system, now the people you planned to use the system against are using it against you.

Sounds brilliant, lets do this.

> your political opponents

are on the same "side" with you. A country is not divided into two (or more) political sides. A country is divided into classes.

It was even how modern voting system originated. See: Estates-General, Prussian three-class franchise, etc.

See also: both parties of the US didn't release Epstein files.

The sooner Americans realize the democrats and the republicans aren't actually in opposition, the sooner we maybe get some parties who are.

I think we were moving in that direction. But when Newsom starting posting snark on social media they all fell back in line. People want to be on the winning side. Given the enforcement of the dichotomy they pick one.