Turn on thread page Beta

Revenge of the Nanny State watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Tony Blair this week (in so many words) called an end to the reign of the 1960's liberal consensus, which has until now been dominant in the laws, etc. of this country.

    Nobody doubts that the 1960's produced a lot of great things (civil rights and all that malarkey), but was this somewhat laissez-faire attitude towards individual liberty one of them? Examine some of labour's recent ham-handed policies, for example, not allowing parents to smack their children, or satellite-tracking thingys bolted to the legs of criminals. In a way, a complete antithesis of the attitudes prevalent during the 60's.

    Blair may be waxing lyrical about his '5 year plan' (sound familiar? *cough* Stalin *cough* Chairman Mao *cough*), which seems like an election gimmick to me, but what, essentially, does this increasing intrusion of Mr Government into people's lives spell out for society? Is it right for those in power to think that the individual is incapable of running his / her own life, and that the government must take control? Crime will reduce, in all probability, but at what cost? Moderation, as always, is the key, but in this case are we perhaps coming slightly too close to a dystopia?

    In short, it comes down to the question (to quote from popular literature), which is preferable: freedom to, or freedom from?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Leave Mr Blair alone, he's only trying to follow in Mrs Thatchers steps. New Labour is the New Thatcher party
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pinkfairy)
    Leave Mr Blair alone, he's only trying to follow in Mrs Thatchers steps. New Labour is the New Thatcher party
    They're just pretenders. In my opinion, they should let Mrs Thatcher be in charge again. Or, at least, cryogenically freeze her so that her wisdom may be avaliable to future societies.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks to some terribly difficult reserach (googling nany state) I found this BBC article that claims a survey has shown that 3/4 of the general public favour governement intervention of matters of diet and public smoking.... I think it depends on the individual issue, for example thanks to the Daily Mail and other fine publications it would be hugely unlikely that you could find 10 per cent of the population who would argue against satellite tracking on offenders (i would however put myself in the minority here).

    Where people believe that there is an influence on their own safety or health they will actively encourage labours populist gilded assistance, but where it seeks to limit the supposed personal freedoms imbedded within the British mindset - ie being told when you can buy a pint etc they will object vehemently
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3839447.stm
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    They're just pretenders. In my opinion, they should let Mrs Thatcher be in charge again. Or, at least, cryogenically freeze her so that her wisdom may be avaliable to future societies.
    Blair should try liberalism for once. You like Thatcher :eek:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pinkfairy)
    Blair should try liberalism for once. You like Thatcher :eek:
    Blair was a liberal - he was a member of CND as a young chap...now he thinks being liberal means we should all walk around with bar codes on our foreheads (call them id cards if you must)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pinkfairy)
    Blair should try liberalism for once. You like Thatcher :eek:
    I think it was said 'tongue-in-cheek'
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cossack)
    Thanks to some terribly difficult reserach (googling nany state) I found this BBC article that claims a survey has shown that 3/4 of the general public favour governement intervention of matters of diet and public smoking.... I think it depends on the individual issue, for example thanks to the Daily Mail and other fine publications it would be hugely unlikely that you could find 10 per cent of the population who would argue against satellite tracking on offenders (i would however put myself in the minority here).

    Where people believe that there is an influence on their own safety or health they will actively encourage labours populist gilded assistance, but where it seeks to limit the supposed personal freedoms imbedded within the British mindset - ie being told when you can buy a pint etc they will object vehemently
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3839447.stm
    Like I said, moderation is key. Mr Blair seems intent, not just on cutting back on matters to do with crime, but also intruding into people's lives as far as is permissable - like you say, banning smoking in public and limiting / expanding drinking hours (buggered if i know which).

    Of course, this is minor compared to PC Brussels, churning out bizarre laws every which-way. For example, a hotel has to have doors of a certain width to accomodate wheelchair-bound people. Fair enough, you might say. However, the hotel that my family owns had to widen the width of all 300 doors (costing over £100,000), depsite the fact that no rooms are on the ground floor, so wheelchair-bound people can't stay in the hotel anyway!

    Quite silly, if you ask me.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cossack)
    Blair was a liberal -
    He isn't liberal now. I don't like his suggestion that liberalism is a 1960s invention :mad:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by waiting2smile)
    He isn't liberal now. I don't like his suggestion that liberalism is a 1960s invention :mad:
    I think thats Mr Whites conjecture rather than something that Blair has himself said.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by waiting2smile)
    He isn't liberal now. I don't like his suggestion that liberalism is a 1960s invention :mad:
    Well, it isn't. But the 1960's atmosphere of cultural change is what elevated it to the point of becoming politically domininant.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cossack)
    I think thats Mr Whites conjecture rather than something that Blair has himself said.
    Oh, he did say it. To quote, "it is time to mark the end of the 1960s liberal consensus". Ahem.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cossack)
    I think thats Mr Whites conjecture rather than something that Blair has himself said.
    No I read a few articles on it myself, Mr Blair may not have stated it explicitly but it was implied and my father was furious :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    Oh, he did say it. To quote, "it is time to mark the end of the 1960s liberal consensus". Ahem.
    my apologises....I have just read the article, and it was in the context only of law and order he didnt enter the realm of politcal correctness and other forms of intervention...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pinkfairy)
    Leave Mr Blair alone, he's only trying to follow in Mrs Thatchers steps. New Labour is the New Thatcher party
    I agree with you there. The evil of the 1960s was a favourite theme of hers (she blamed it for it's permissiveness), so not surprising he'd follow suit. I wonder what ideas of hers he'll adopt next? :rolleyes:
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.