I don't think I really implied the people of the UK didn't want it? The UK and most of Europe seemingly love the government policing their speech even in private communications.

The concept of free expression basically doesn't exist in most of the UK/EU today and that's scary.

If this were true, the papers wouldn't have run an article yesterday bitching about the lords sending back the workers rights bill again.

The commons may _eventually_ overrule them, but it takes time and costs political capital.

The majority of our population want more law, more rules, more restrictions : they don't see the value or enjoyment in doing something, so they don't think anyone should be able to do it.

Ask the average joe whether or not cars should prevent drivers from being able to "chose" to break the speed limit: You'll get a resounding "yes" 8/10 times - the value of freewill seems to be increasing lost on my country men.

"Never let a good crisis go to waste."

The "think of the children!" argument has long been used by people in government to give themselves more power. In this case there's been a global effort to shut down unapproved speech. The government gains the power to censor and arrest for "bad speech" but it also gets to decide how the labels for the same are applied. There have been panel discussions and speeches on this at the WEF, and discussions of tactics for selling or pushing through this kind of legislation for at least a decade.

That's how we got that video of John Kerry lamenting the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.

So under the aegis of "think of the children!" (which may or may not have come from "grass roots" organizations) you get a committee with the power to decide what speech is badthink or wrongthink, label it as such, and hand out arrest warrants for it.

Disagree with policy: that's "hate" or "misinformation" or "inflammatory."

Voice a moral opinion: that's "hate" or "bigotry" or "intolerance."

Express doubt over a leader's actions: that's "misinformation" or "inflammatory."

Fascinating that they're more worried about VPN use than about shutting down rape gangs.

In Britain in particular? The NSPCC, Molly Rose Foundation, IWF among a bunch of others. 70% of Brits are supportive of the online safety act[1], it's been supported by Conservatives, Labour and the SNP.

There's simply no data in favor of the argument that this is a minority position or even some kind of conspiracy. Child safety is (not very surprisingly) usually a voter driven concern. You think banning people from social media is an idea coming from big tech and shadowy three letter agencies? What kind of sense does that make

[1] https://yougov.co.uk/technology/articles/52693-how-have-brit...

> Engage with your children on topics that matter.

And what do we do for the children who have parents who fail them. How do we even detect it in time to help those children?

Similar to the arguments about climate change and how we as individuals should tackle it. Not going to happen sorry.

"If only we would just self organize into communities to protect childen..." ok.