There is a good article on the Verge laying out the horrendous Investigatory Powers Act.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
The UK just legalised everything that Snowden warned us aboutPerry de Havilland (Wiltshire) · Civil liberty, Law & Regulation · Privacy & Panopticon · UK affairs December 4th, 2016 |
 8 comments to The UK just legalised everything that Snowden warned us about |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
There is no problem then – as Sir William Blackstone said that everything Parliament says is the law is the law. Parliament can do no wrong.
Unless one is a “Old Whig” such as Chief Justice Sir John Holt.
And as I am an “Old Whig” (in favour of the boo-hiss the “landed interest” and all) I find the unlimited power of the state rather disturbing.
I rather wish people such as Sir William (whilst still paying lip service to the natural law – natural justice) has not made the Common Law “Hobbes friendly”.
But we live in a post Jeremy Bentham age – our rulers (and educators) do not even pay lip service to natural law (natural justice) now, it is “nonsense on stilts”.
Everything we do and say is a matter of the whims of the state.
Which is, oddly off, rather liberating – as we can all assume we have (without even knowing it) each committed “crimes” subject to unlimited punishment and that the state has (by various means) enough information to blackmail any of us.
So, as long as one does not care about living, one can tell the state exactly where to go.
If one reads modern reference works one would get the impression that the American Founding Fathers loved Sir William Blackstone – they did not, he was competent enough at outlining the general state of the law, but his philosophical grasp on jurisprudence (or rather his lack of one) was awful – and could only lead to endless abuse of power.
But then modern reference works are constantly claiming (or rather implying) that those thinkers who are fashionable now – were always fashionable. And the thinkers who opposed them have been shoved down the Memory Hole. They praise Thomas Hobbes and ignore Ralph Cudworth, they praise David Hume and ignore Thomas Reid. The Western tradition is not refuted – it is ignored, and the enemies of the Western tradition (Hobbes, Hume, Bentham and so on) are treated as if they were the Western tradtion.
Without a proper philosophical basis one can not have a proper legal basis – giving judges more power (against Parliament or Congress and President) is no good if those judges have a bad philosophy – indeed it is worse than the judges not having any power.
And without a legal basis – all of Mr Snowden’s fears come true.
And if Mr Snowden wishes to see the end state of his fears – he need only look around him at the country in which he is now based.
One can not have a functioning Bill of Rights without judges who believe in the philosophy (yes philosophy) on which the Bill of Rights is based.
Not in America, not in Britain – and not in Russia either.
Seen in a completely different forum:
This does not make front page in any newspaper or other media.
It is worth noting that this legislation, enacted by a government now led by former Home Sec, and distinct authortarian, Theresa May, hasn’t been prevented or held up by any EU checks or balances. We have sometimes been told that membership of the EU acted as a sort of check on bad laws, but I have seen little sign of this in a systematic way. Consider the EU Arrest Warrant, for example.
At least once the UK is out of the EU (despite what the Remaniacs hope) it will be a tad easier to reverse such monstrosities by kicking out those who have voted in this sort of nonsense. (I stress the word “tad”, as this is a relative matter.)
Like Lucklucky I am surprised about this. As the ones that broke the Snowden story, I was hoping at least the Guardian might mention it. Not on Guido either. Or is it old news?
Right. It’s of the upmost importance that terrorists be caught before they launch their violent jihads. Otherwise the immigration uber alles folks might be embarrassed or (horrors) be held accountable for the resultant deaths and violence.