UK Government plans new powers to label dissenting movements as 'subversion'
Perceived Western Hypocrisy & Israel
- Many see it as ironic that states long presenting themselves as champions of democracy and free speech are criminalizing protests and speech, particularly when directed at Israel’s actions in Gaza.
- Others argue this authoritarian drift predates the current conflict and stems from broader loss of prosperity, legitimacy, and growing security-state habits.
UK Protest Policing & Palestine Action
- A central example is the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation after actions including breaking into an RAF base and damaging/spray‑painting aircraft, plus an alleged sledgehammer attack on a police officer.
- Critics stress the chilling effect of arresting thousands, including elderly people, under terrorism laws for holding “I support Palestine Action” placards, contrasting this with comparatively softer treatment of more violent right‑wing riots.
- Defenders argue that once a group is formally proscribed, visible support is knowingly risky and that violence and critical infrastructure attacks cross a line.
Expanding “Subversion” & Legal Powers
- Commenters worry that new “state threats” / “cumulative protest” powers, plus Hall’s review language on “counter‑subversion”, could let ideology, not conduct, define security threats (e.g. environmentalism, independence movements, anti‑government criticism).
- Others push back that current amendments look “benign”, aimed at disruptive protests, and that the article overstates things; “subversion” is not yet a defined legal category.
Free Speech, Hate Speech & Online Arrests
- UK arrest figures for online communications are cited as comparable to or worse than some authoritarian states, sparking shock and questions about how this is defended.
- Replies note the statistics are methodologically shaky and often involve conduct already illegal (threats, harassment), but concede the broad, catch‑all nature of UK speech laws.
- There is repeated concern that hate‑speech regimes, once accepted, are inevitably turned against new targets.
Authoritarian Creep, Surveillance & Digital ID
- Several see a classic “tool in the toolbox” pattern: laws sold as targeting terrorists/foreign agents, then used on domestic dissent; once in place, future governments can escalate.
- Digital ID, social‑media policing, and “public order” offences are viewed by some as steps toward a de facto social‑credit system and a not‑really‑free “democracy in name only.”
Ideology, History & the “Strong Men” Quote
- A long subthread debates the popular “hard times create strong men…” aphorism:
- Supporters see it as describing historical cycles of hardship, discipline, prosperity, and decay.
- Critics call it shallow, proto‑fascist, historically illiterate, and a justification for suffering and social‑Darwinist politics.
- This ties into broader worries about rising fascist tendencies in Europe and reactions to “good times” and inequality.
Media Literacy & Partisanship
- Some highlight that the source is a left‑wing advocacy group and accuse HN of amplifying low‑quality, partisan UK‑bashing.
- Others counter that, whatever the source’s bias, current use of terrorism and public‑order powers against protestors shows the risk is real, not hypothetical.
Wider Despair About Democracy & the “Marketplace of Ideas”
- Multiple comments express hopelessness: liberal institutions seem unable to resist either hard‑right authoritarianism or technocratic speech control.
- There is skepticism that “counter‑speech” works in an attention‑driven content economy dominated by state, corporate and lobbyist messaging.
- Some advocate emigration within Europe; others note there is no obvious safe, genuinely free alternative.