Big Brother is watching you…
And after the murder of Sir David Amess, a member of the British Parliament who was stabbed multiple times at a church while holding a public gathering, the politicians who make up the Big Brother collective around the world are now worried about their safety.
Funny how that happens, right?
All of a sudden, as soon as something affects them, they do whatever they can to keep themselves safe.
Imagine if they felt the same way for their constituents…
However, there’s a line that should not be crossed, and it’s a line that Ben Franklin told us all about in his discourse on safety and freedom.
Old Ben was a brilliant man, which is why some of today’s politicians should maybe review some of his writings, especially in the quest to balance freedom and security.
Ben Franklin once wrote, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
That means NOBODY should give up ANY of their freedoms in order to feel safe…
Think about it: You can be safe inside of a cage…but who cares about that safety if you’re not free?
British Home Secretary Looking At HUGE Change
Well, in a knee-jerk reaction to Amess’ shocking murder at the hands of a suspected terrorist, British Home Secretary Priti Patel has suggested it’s time to CROSS that line, setting a precedent for her own country and the rest of the world…including the USA.
Appearing on Britain’s Sky News, Patel said that she will “look into everything” in order to keep herself and other politicians safe, including ending online anonymity for the people of the United Kingdom.
Patel said, “There is work taking place already. We have an Online Harms Bill that will come to Parliament, there is working taking place on it right now. I’ve done a lot of work on social media platforms, mainly around encryption and areas of that nature.”
For those wondering, the Online Harms Bill is a paper in Britain’s parliament that “sets out the government’s plans for a world-leading package of online safety measures that also supports innovation and a thriving digital economy.”
However, according to the bill, it’s more than just “safety” they’re looking to promote.
The main objective is control.
There is a section in the bill that states that “even inaccurate information, regardless of intent, can be harmful,” and the bill enforces policing through online social media platforms with penalties of heavy fines and even jail time for offenders.
Before signing off, Patel added that her country cannot “carry on like this,” saying: “I spend too much time with communities who have been under attack, basically who have had all sorts of postings online and it is a struggle to get those posts taken down. We want to make some big changes on that.”
And her way of doing so is to get rid of anonymity online, all to make sure that people’s feelings aren’t hurt.
Why Are We So Concerned With FEELINGS?
She argues that social media was the root cause of an increasingly contentious political landscape in Britain, saying that MPs are subject to relentless “cruel comments” and “attacks” online.
And while she may not be wrong, that’s the double-edged sword of the services these social media platforms provide.
It’s simple: If you’re afraid of getting your feelings hurt on social media, don’t create an account. There…problem solved.
The real problem is thar Britain doesn’t have an equivalent to the First Amendment. Their speech isn’t protected by law, so, the unfortunate reality is that this law will probably pass.
This would be a BAD development, because if it passes in Britain, American Liberals will likely seize on the newly-established precedent, using it as a blueprint to institute something similar over here.
That’s how politics work.
If you don’t think there aren’t Democrats in DC just champing at the bit to put even more restrictions on Americans—or worse, find another reason to spy on their social media—you’re only fooling yourself.
That’s what these people live for… control.
That’s what they want – and so we can only pray that Conservatives in Britain battle this law tooth and nail, because nothing is more sacred than our right to privacy.
Only time will tell…
If you want total security, go to prison. There you’re fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking… is freedom.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower