It was with something akin to delight that I saw the Times, not a newspaper overly concerned with civil liberties, have on its front page 1 an article about objections to Britain’s developing surveillance state.
This is modern Britain
If we cannot get these issues out in the open, we will indeed see Britain ‘sleepwalking’ into what may some time in the future be a panoptic nightmare. Blair or Howard are not going to be having the security services doing ‘midnight knocks’ on the doors of those they disfavour (well, maybe for a few people in the Finsbury Park area) but make no mistake about it, the infrastructure of repression is being put in place at an astonishing rate and someday (hopefully long after I have decamped to New Hampshire) this information is going to be used by statists of both left and right with fewer qualms than Tony Blair to order every single aspect of people’s lives in Britain in ways that places the state at the centre of everything you do in ways earlier totalitarianisms could only dream of… for your own good, of course.
We have a serious battle to win and the more these issues are out of the committee rooms and in the more general public arena, the better we can argue the case for resisting the emerging Panopticon State.
When the state watches you, dare to stare back
1 = Readers outside the UK may have difficulties accessing this link once it is archived due to the benighted policies of the Times newspaper.
(Cross posted from White Rose)
That second picture is your answer to Secure Beneath The Watchful Eyes ?
Uhhh…there was a second picture, right?
You can only see what Big Brother wants you do see, Anghelone… actually, I was just editing the post
Ha! Some good your editing will do you when I get me one of these.
(hopefully long after I have decamped to New Hampshire)
I remember a comment of yours, some time past, in reply to one of mine, that you looked forward to the day when London had a population of 20 million, and that you enjoyed the sense of hustle that all these new migrants bought to the community.
You chose to ignore all the extra crime they bought with them, assuming them to be all ambitious entrepreneurs, who would follow similar cultural constraints to the indigent population. They are not, and they do not…
That the policing of such a multi-cultural society involves losing some ‘civil liberty’, probably did not occur to you at that time, and, of course you were trying to make a point about ‘new blood’ and vitality etc…
However, I now see that it is all too much for you as well, and that you have the intention of decamping to NH….
I assume a: you have ‘seen the light’, that unassimilated multi-culturalism just does not work.
b: Being a libertarian, minarchist, or whatever, and believing in ‘small’ government, also does not work in the above mentioned environment.
And c: Having such a fragmented, disoriented, disjointed society is unmanageable without overbearing supervision and subsequent loss of liberty.
Places that I have personal experience of, as disparate as Hong Kong and America, both have large immigrant populations, but they are largely assimilated and behave within the indigent cultural expectations, and thus need somewhat less police supervision.
Yes I know you will mention the USA and all the new Dept. of Homeland Security laws, but these are largely to supervise the unassimilated immigrants that have recently arrived from the ME, and are being devised to be politically correct so as not to offend anyone, but of course, being written by bureaucrats, they manage to offend everyone, but the very people they are trying to control.
The case in the UK is very different, where immigrants are not encouraged to assimilate, and you end up with an ‘Epcot’ version of the UN. where every community is a law unto itself…
As a Sci-fi fan, I am sure you have seen ‘Blade Runner’, it was supposed to be a fictional prophecy for L.A. , but it seemed to me that it more accurately described the future for London. It looks to be well on the way….
Says who? I am indeed an ‘assimilationist’ and regard assimilation as inevitable unless the state is actively working to prevent it… and if the state does prevent it, that is an argument for less state, not less immigration. As for dealing with crime, again, I am quite content to look after myself (I am a subscriber to a privately funded neighbourhood watch scheme) and I do not appreciate the fact the state insists on me being defenceless whilst at the same time arming and armouring its blue coated policemen… but again that is an argument for less, not more, state.
Civil society can absorb a great many people if the state does not prevent natural social evolutionary processes from working… and the reason I intend to get myself a ‘lifeboat’ in New Hampshire is the British state shows every inclination to do exactly that.
Perry,
Are you planning to go to NH as part of the FSP?
It gets worse.
One wonders if junior Home Office ministers are now one some form of bonus, rather like Westminster parking attendants, to see how many civil liberties they can infringe per day. Hazel Blears now seems to be in the running for the 2 weeks in Costa Del Sol and the lifetime subscription to Surveillance Weekly with this little gem she and her civil servants have dreamed up.
Surely assimilation requires intermarriage. Unfortunately, Muslim girls who consort with non-Muslim men tend not to be treated too well by their “community”.Non-Muslim women who marry Muslim men tend to convert.Large numbers of uneducated, non-Anglophone Muslim women are imported every year for arranged (often forced) marriage. I can’t see assimilation happening whatever Government policy is. And unlike Hindus and Sikhs, they don’t even integrate.
And could advocates of large-scale Third World immigration please provide some evidence (any evidence) that it will:
a) Increase per capita GDP
b) Improve the public finances
c) Improve wage rates for the indigenous population
d) Reduce unemployment for the indigenous population
Martin:
“Surely assimilation requires intermarriage”
What do assimilation or intermarriage have to do with anything? There are numerous instances of different ethnic groups cohabiting together peaceably for centuries without assimilation or intermarriage.
It is unfortunate that certain ethnic groups have become collective wards of the State, with all that that entails; but the answer is not to agitate for assimilation or intermarriage – it is to agitate for the least possible State interference in people’s affairs.
Martin: United States has large scale immigration from ‘Third World’ and an increasing per capital GDP… as for public finances, who cares? Not me. I am not sure what relevance employment amongst American Indians has (the indigenous population)…
I know many assimulated beer drinking Muslims in Britain, so I am not very bothered by a hard core of unassimulated God squad Muslims as all it takes is a gemeration or two for their women to marry out regardless.
[Yet another thread hijacked by the anti-immigrationists]
Martin,
And could advocates of large-scale Third World immigration please provide some evidence (any evidence) that it will:
a) Increase per capita GDP
b) Improve the public finances
c) Improve wage rates for the indigenous population
d) Reduce unemployment for the indigenous population
The mistake you make is to assume that those of us who are opposed to intrusive government and immigration restrictions nonetheless share with those who are in favour of intrusive government and immigration restrictions a similar utilitarian social engineering focus. As it happens, given a free market in labour as well as goods, and assuming that benefit tourism may be eliminated, all of those things probably will happen. But that is not why freedom of movement is a good thing.
For one, it requires an extensive government apparatus to police immigration, not only in terms of policing entry to the country but also regulating those, including “indigenous” who trade with “illegals”. I don’t recognise any “right” to a job or a “right” to a job at a specified rate. I do recognise a right to associate with whomever one wishes. At heart the anti-immigration argument is protectionist. I don’t see why I should be forced by the government to employ somebody whose sole qualification is “indigenousness” over someone better qualified for the job who happens to have been born outside the EU.
To get back on topic. The Times is slightly schizophrenic on the topic of creeping government surveillance. Oliver Kamm seems rather complacent in suggesting there’s nothing to worry about:
Yet ironically it is the pedestrian quality of mainstream politicians’ interventions that provides reassurance that the issue is marginal, a discussion about where the boundaries properly lie between privacy and civic obligation. Lacking sharply-defined ideological differences, Westminster politics has little sense of the malign, let alone totalitarian, as opposed to illiberal or merely incompetent, exercise of power.
It is one of those rare occasions I agree unreservedly with Perry.
Although I couldn’t stomach the weather in NH – when I next leave the UK it will be to live somewhere more sunny.
Sorry, Oliver Kamm piece is here
Perry: what evidence do you have that Muslim women will marry out in “a generation or two”? How will they
meet non-Muslim men if they attend “Faith” schools, have their movements constantly monitored , have marriages arranged for them at an early age, are denied further education and have low participation rates in the workforce?
I work for a large firm in Leicester; I have lots of Hindu and Sikh female colleagues but not a single female Muslim has worked for us in ten years( and yes, I can tell the difference.)
And as for economics, I’m talking about the UK, not the USA (which, unlike the UK, is an immigrant society). And aren’t you confusing cause and effect?And shouldn’t anyone who pays tax in the UK care about the effect of immigration on the public finances?
Cydonia: I’m not “agitating” for intermarriage , I’m opposing mass third world immigration.If anyone could come up with a convincing argument for it , I might change my mind, but I won’t hold my breath.
Because I see them wandering down the streets of central London in short skirts.
As I said before, I am not over concerned about the pro neo-Dark Ages God squad as they are not the majority of muslims. If the full weight of social and economic pressure is allowed to fall on those who decline to integrate, the disadvantages of non-assimilation would be such that more would assimilate or leave.
Only the state can prevent non-assimilated muslims from bearing the consequences of their actions by restricting free speech about the realities of the practice of muslim culture and by making them wards of the state via ‘social security’, so again, the issue is not immigration but the toxic effects of excessive intervention by the state in preventing British society from reacting appropriately to absorb members of another culture.
And by the way… the article is about surveillance and ID cards, so discussion of immigration will not continue in this thread.
Frank McGahon: that’s a long-winded way of saying you have no evidence but you do have faith.
I agree that I’m making a mistake: I’m assuming you all deal with the world (and the UK) as it is rather than your Utopian vision. As long as a welfare state exists a UK employer who employs an immigrant on low wages passes most of the associated costs (tax credits,education costs, medical costs etc) on to other people in general and me in particular. I’m not very happy about that.
hallelujah! the man has achieved enlightenment! the problem is THE WELFARE STATE not immigration per se.
I think this might worry “Snide”, but he makes a good point.
NH can be quite warm in the summer. The nice thing about NH is that you actually get 4 proper seasons, with all their variety in activities and ambiance.
The accompanying Times leader, however, was very lukewarm. Today’s Evening Standard on the other hand seems willing to run with the story, having a double-page spread “Big Brother watches you 300 times a day”, and a leader, “Keep watch on Big Brother”.
I think this point is very well made by the original author. This is an argument for a reduction in state control and for the right of self defence for the law abiding citizen. Assimilation is the best way forward on immigration policies, but the current government favours a new form of aparin that it is trying to promote a “separation” in its drive to foster “diversity”. At its heart the “apartheid” system was about preserving the differences between different cultures. We need to think very, very carefully about the implications hiding behind the current drive from government to preserve “cultural diversity” and “multi-cultural” societies. From experience, it leads to repression. Is this what you want?
Apologies – my computer is playing silly games today – the “word” in the end of line 4 of my comment should read – “new form of Apartheid in that…”
The ‘original author’ was writing about ID cards and stuff, so who gives a fuck about immigration?!?!
I have a question about all these cameras. I work in a pharmacy in the US. We recently bought a wireless digital security camera (only $250). A day’s video footage is between 1 to 2 gigabytes of data. I frequently have to backup the data onto to DVD. My question is where does all this video footage go and who the hell looks at it all? Also is it digital or analogue. Just wondering.
The cameras in that picture are most likely digital CCTV (Closed Circuit Television) surveillance cameras I should think – i.e. they are on a dedicated network linked to a number of monitoring stations all on that network.
Usually you record a number of hours onto a central computer server, for fast access, and then transfer that footage onto digital tape One of the many advantages of a DCCTV system is the ability to record multiple simulataneous takes onto a single digital tape, currently the technology permits about 16 cameras’ footage on one tape, with such a tape being able to hold up to 960 hours of continuous surveillance footage.
If you want to decrease the amount of disk space your current setup uses, I would strongly suggest you look at alternative applications that would allow you to store footage in MPEG4 or DiVX formats (high quality video storage formats that take up less space than the usual .mov, mpg or .avi formats do).