Britain's Orwellian Thought Police

Britain once gave the world the idea of liberty under law. Now it gives us police knocking on doors over tweets.

Not threats.
Not violence.
Words.

Welcome to the age of the “Non-Crime Hate Incident.”

The Crime That Isn’t a Crime

Under guidance from the College of Policing, officers have been encouraged to record so-called Non-Crime Hate Incidents — speech perceived to be hateful, even if it breaks no law.

Read that again.

No law broken.
No charge laid.
No court appearance.

Yet your name may be logged in a police database.

This is not justice. It is pre-emptive suspicion. A bureaucratic scarlet letter.

Blasphemy Rebranded

Britain abolished formal blasphemy laws in 2008. Or so we were told.

Yet today, criticism of certain religions — particularly Islam — can trigger police “engagement.” A knock on the door. A warning. A quiet note in a file.

Technically lawful.
Practically intimidating.

The State does not need to prosecute you to silence you. It merely needs to remind you it can.

The Real Damage

The defenders say this is about community harmony.

But harmony enforced by fear is not harmony — it is compliance.

When citizens begin to ask not “Is this true?” but “Will this get me in trouble?” the battle for free speech is already lost.

The genius of this system is that it rarely produces martyrs. It produces hesitation.

Self-censorship.

And once a population polices its own thoughts, the State’s work is largely done.

A Dangerous Precedent

The British tradition was built on the idea that speech should be free unless it directly incites violence.

Now it is free unless someone feels offended.

That is not a legal standard.
That is an emotional one.

And emotional standards shift with the political wind.

The Knock at the Door

Tyranny does not always arrive in jackboots.

Sometimes it arrives politely. With a clipboard. With a “friendly chat.” With reassurance that you’ve done nothing illegal — this time.

Britain may insist it has no blasphemy laws.

But when police record lawful speech because someone dislikes it, the name hardly matters.

If the State can knock on your door for your opinions, you are no longer entirely free.

And if that does not alarm you, it should.

Well done Malcolm!

Given the many times I have criticized our PM in my posts, I must take the opportunity to praise him when it is appropriate to do so. So a hearty "Well done Malcolm!" for taking up the fight to change 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. Yes, I know, it also happens to be expedient for him. It displays his liberal credentials but is not likely to pass. I guess that is true but it would be uncharitable to look for the negatives in a decision that has not been easy.

He knew any change to 18C would draw both personal and political criticism from not only those in the opposition parties, but from many vocal ethnic minority groups, the media and even members of his on party. That sounds like lose-lose proposition. Indeed his predecessor lost credibility by his unwillingness to pursue the issue.

Maybe, indeed more likely than not,  given the current numbers in the senate and even the house of representatives, the critical changes to remove the words "insult, humiliate or offend" will not be passed by parliament.

But for such fundamental questions of principle it does not matter. On the contrary, it provides an opportunity to contrast the differences between the parties, and the cross benchers. Where should a society draw the line between Freedom of speech and the potential for abuse of such a freedom against minorities? Do we want an open society where the laws encourage open debate of all issues and allow social interactions to counter any extreme elements? Or do we want to impose artificial constraints on such freedoms and try to control the very words that citizens can utter ?
It comes down to the fundamental issue of how our society should operate. That is certainly worthy of a debate and much more important than how the economic pie is divided. By taking this stand Malcolm has shown he has the guts to stand up and fight even if he is likely to lose. I for one appreciate his willingness to fight for the type of society I would like. Well done Malcolm!