Yup. Drove about 5 urban miles today. Several people speeding. 5 cars deliberately crossing red lights and a few not giving way when there's an obstruction in their side of the road.

Entirely normal here in Colchester..

There certainly is a fair amount of political vanity here with the Welsh government. Pushed through plenty of moral high ground stuff similar to this eg anti smacking, minimum alcohol pricing, anti smoking, COVID regs etc but woeful record on the big issues such as M4 relief road, integrated transport, NHS management, all hopeless! I say this a Labour supporter too!

Pushed through plenty of moral high ground stuff similar to this eg anti smacking, minimum alcohol pricing, anti smoking, COVID regs etc ...

Although most of us dislike the concept of the nanny state, most of the issues you mention are attempts to persuade more people to recognise common sense by applying some force. Surely you don't dispute the idea behind it? Ah - of course it should all be voluntary, and ignored when inconvenient.

Quite correct that some of these things are, at first sight, praiseworthy. The key point is that these behaviours should be encouraged but voluntary.

Putting them into law is the thin edge of the wedge that leads to even further erosion of our freedoms than we have already suffered.

<< Putting them into law is the thin edge of the wedge that leads to even further erosion of our freedoms than we have already suffered. >>

That amounts to saying that eroding one's freedom is OK, but only when self-inflicted. Which seems to be little more than saying you don't like being told what to do, even if you actually agree with it ?

Exactly. I used to drink and smoke, gave up of my own accord, I object to all the nanny-state edicts from people who think they know what is best for me.

There used to be a (partly) humorous comparison of countries which ran as follows:

In England, everything is allowed unless it is specifically forbidden

In Germany, everything is forbidden unless it is specifically allowed

In France, everything is allowed, even if it is forbidden.

There used to be quite a degree of truth is this, now less so where England is concerned

Exactly. I used to drink and smoke, gave up of my own accord, I object to all the nanny-state edicts from people who think they know what is best for me.

Do you not find that they generally do? And if there were no people saying you should stop something would you have continued to smoke and drink?

Given long experience of politicians and so-called experts making wrong decisions, changing their mind as a result of unforeseen consequences and their susceptibility to influence from vested interests and vociferous minority pressure groups, no, I am not convinced that they generally do know what is best for me.

If my actions do no harm to anyone else why should I be ordered about by distant bureaucrats, over whom I have no effective control? And don't talk about 'voting' because whoever you vote for (at national or local level) there is little change, because the same 'experts' and advisers stay in place.

<< Given long experience of politicians and so-called experts making wrong decisions, changing their mind as a result of unforeseen consequences .... If my actions do no harm to anyone else why should I be ordered about by distant bureaucrats >>

Presumably the actions you speak of never have any unforeseen consequences ?

My actions are unlikely to affect the lives of thousands or millions of other people, which is the difference between my actions and Government or local authority actions,.

I would have thought this is obvious, is it not?

<< My actions are unlikely to affect the lives of thousands or millions of other people, which is the difference between my actions and Government or local authority actions >>

So basically you are an anarchist, because you don't believe there should be any authority which might make decisions adversely affecting thousands of people ?

I never said any such thing (though authorities have made bad decisions and still do. A classic example in today's Telegraph of how 13 civil service mandarins made our new 'aircraft carriers' ineffective by preventing the fitting of catapults, purely to keep the Typhoon in production instead of the sensible options. Read it and weep for the underhand tactics used, the waste of taxpayers cash and weakening of our defences)

.I merely stated that I do not like my personal preferences in minor aspects to be dictated by often unelected bureaucrats, such as the examples in the article referred to.

Individual freedom used to be a reason why people wanted to live in Britain, if you don't like the idea of choice just say so, you would be happy in Orwell's 1984, wouldn't you?

<< Individual freedom used to be a reason why people wanted to live in Britain, if you don't like the idea of choice just say so, you would be happy in Orwell's 1984, wouldn't you? >>

Although you are happy that your actions have no significant effect on others, the fact remains that we all depend on the society we are part of. So laws have accumulated - some of them no doubt irksome - to try to balance individuals' different freedoms. You clearly consider that such laws should not be necessary as everyone should conform voluntarily without coercion. Nice idea !

For information, I have never been convicted of any criminal offence and have had a clean driving licence for 62 years up to now in at least 500,000 miles here and overseas.

So not an anarchist, am I?

.

Edited by galileo on 18/07/2022 at 12:35

"No wonder so many young people have recently (and increasingly) been (so easily and quickly) fooled into blindly following authoritarian measures and that leave them subserviant / dependent on the state and megacorps, and who never question any new dictat but do go after (on such organisations' behalf) people who do."

1. What evidence is there that a significant number of young people are "blindly following authoritarian measures"?

2. What precisely are the "authoritarian measures" they are allegedly following?

"No wonder so many young people have recently (and increasingly) been (so easily and quickly) fooled into blindly following authoritarian measures and that leave them subserviant / dependent on the state and megacorps, and who never question any new dictat but do go after (on such organisations' behalf) people who do."

1. What evidence is there that a significant number of young people are "blindly following authoritarian measures"?

2. What precisely are the "authoritarian measures" they are allegedly following?

_______________________

"Perhaps you need to look more closely at what's been happening over the past few years, especially during the pandemic."

I don't need to do anything, Andy. I'm certainly not going to provide guesses as to what you meant. I was hoping you would be able to clarify what you had expressed only vaguely.

Perhaps you don't want a discussion about it. But then, why raise it in the first place?

"That you seemingly want to go that way suggests you a) know full well what I meant and b) want to take it away from the original topic to perhaps try and engender the thread to be shut down by deliberately inflaming the discussion.

Thesedays I have zero interest in going down the petty bickering route, as I realised it does no-one or a discussion any good. It also drives people away from the forum."

I'm disappointed by these comments. You seem to be suggesting I was deliberately obtuse in failing to jump to conclusions about what you meant and that I wanted to derail the discussion in some way by inflaming it.

I suggest this itself is an unpleasant insinuation - that I'm not interested in commenting on ideas, but have some other agenda.

I will leave it to others to ponder your comment about petty bickering.

Plenty of young people thought being ruled by people we don’t elect was a good idea if it meant they let us travel without a visa.

Oh here we go again.

We elected MEPs and the laws of the EU were ratified by an elected parliament and our own parliament.

There seems to be a lot of thread drift, so off to general discussion.

MOD

<< We had only a minor number of MEPs so the EU parliament and laws it passed were chiefly made by other countries. I wish I could share your faith that elections put the right people into power. >>

In any election it will be possible to grumble about being in some minority, therefore the result is somehow wrong. The main objection to MEP elections was the poor turnout, presumably because many electors weren't bothered about the result. Still a minority, but self-inflicted.

The Nazi party won a majority of seats in1933 and Hitler was made Chancellor according to the constitution at the time.

We had only a minor number of MEPs so the EU parliament and laws it passed were chiefly made by other countries.

I wish I could share your faith that elections put the right people into power.

Godwin's law strikes again.

What the hell has Hitler got to do with the discussion?

You join a club, you accept its rules. Besides the EU laws as I said were ratified by the EU parliament and passed into law in this country by our parliament. That's democracy in action. If you want to argue about minority governments then virtually all the ruling parties in our government have been elected by a minority of the voters.

<< You join a club, you accept its rules. >>

Yes, and while you are a member you can try to modify the rules by persuasion. That's what made Brexit look like little more than a fit of pique.

Exactly