Vocal Voices

A government report says that online trolls (such a 1990's term) should be barred from standing for public office such as MPs or councillors. It claims that "talented people" are being put off from standing for election because of comments made in the media and online.

Get a backbone. People in public office have been criticised sine the beginning of time precisely because they are very rarely "talented", most are self-serving imbeciles - BoJo or Sadiq Khan anyone?.

Also we cannot just ban people who are critical if they have not broken any law. And who will be making the decision about who to ban? Will it be other snowflakes or people with a spine and a thicker skin?

Ah, but come on, it is such an easy way of rooting out those who are unfit to rule (namely those who actually know what is going on and actually question it.

It is, however, highly amusing when said "acceptable" MP's put their foot into it, up to their necks, by doing the self same thing on social media...

But it's a dangerous game Suff.

You say something, well within the law, and I disagree so report you. The next thing is that you can never stand for public office if the wonks agree with me.

It's all part of the push to control the internet.

Mainstream politicians and mainstream media have both lost influence because of the web and they want that influence back.
There are multiple sources of information now. The internet carries stories - true stories - that the mainstream media won't touch. Our ruling classes are determined to try and change that. The internet provides a platform for opinions our political class don't like.

The election of Trump wasn't supposed to happen, Brexit wasn't supposed to happen, the rise of populism in Europe wasn't supposed to happen.

Banning people from public office if they don't fit the increasingly narrow idea of what is correct is another part of the censorship, banning and blaming that our society has just started out on.

cromwell wrote:Banning people from public office if they don't fit the increasingly narrow idea of what is correct is another part of the censorship, banning and blaming that our society has just started out on.

That is bad enough but the bigger danger comes from those who will be doing the blaming and banning. They will no doubt self-select themselves in the same way the PC brigades do, and then it is they who will define what is acceptable and what is not - no appeal.

It has already happened.

The only alternative is to vote for totally and completely unacceptable people in order to redress the balance. Do enough of that and it will scare the PC idiots out of a decade of growth. Just ask the Swedes. Cats and Dogs living in harmony for no other reason than to keep the barbarian hordes out of power...

We are sliding into a much more authoritarian world.

News which the authorities don't like will be classified as "fake news" and banned. Opinions which the authorities don't like will be called "hate speech" - and banned.

We are going towards a 1984-lite world. Less tolerant, more authoritiarian and with slogans replacing rational thought.

One of the most worrying aspects with all of this is that many people, possibly a majority, do not appreciate what is going on or worse still, do not care.

Here is a good example of the fake news agenda from the BBC.

New Zealand sexist road sign changed by seven-year-old girl.

It is a front page article in the World News section and it claims that seven-year-old Zoe did it all herself.... good girl, good story.

Then you need to go look at her mum, Caitlin. She is a mum of two, feminist, gardener and conservationist who lives in the bushy western hills of the Hutt Valley. Her paid gig is in media and communications and you just know that she had absolutely nothing whatsoever in a million years to do with Zoe "noticing" the sign and writing the letter "in her own words". No prompting from mum, no help with spelling, punctuation and grammar, Zoe just went to the drawer for pen and paper to write her complaint. As if!

Caitlin Carew knew damned well that if she wrote the complaint in her own name it might not get acted upon, so she used her daughter's name as a nom-de-plume for greater effect.

Workingman wrote:One of the most worrying aspects with all of this is that many people, possibly a majority, do not appreciate what is going on or worse still, do not care.

Do not care enough to understand. So, one day, they will wake up and wonder why they are unable to do anything they want to do.

Worst of all, most people will stop wanting to do what the 1984ers don't want them to do and they will be happy with it....

I'll be dead. They can get on with it.