For the children
The UK is preparing a large database tracking program to monitor all the children in the country. According to this article:
Computer records holding details of school performance, diet and even whether their parents provide a ‘positive role model’ for 12 million children will be held by the Government.
Police, social workers, teachers and doctors will have access to the database and have powers to flag up ‘concerns’ where children are not meeting criteria laid down by the state.
Is this the best Europe has to offer the world? A “soft” dictatorship in which the homes of all private citizens are continually monitored according to the “criteria laid down by the state”?
Don’t kid yourself — this is a gross encroachment on freedom and individual rights, regardless of what the purported purpose of the law might be.
When will people realize that tyranny can be masked in good intentions? There is a reason that the United States Constitution bars the government from assuming unto itself powers that are not explicitly enumerated, regardless of the “intentions” of politicians, however “benevolent” they may sound.
If the citizens of the UK don’t immediately react to this program and remove their politicians from office, they are only getting what they deserve. Perhaps that is what they want — they are not willing to take responsibility for their own children, so they want the state to raise them. The forfeiture of responsibility is the forfeiture of rights, pure and simple.
7 comments
As C.S. Lewis once said, there is no tyrant worse than the one who is being tyrannical “for your own good.”
What concerns me the most is who will be the one to define the terms \’positive role model\’ and how extensive are these criteria laid down by the state? In one way I can see where they are coming from. It is not that the parents are about to forfeit their rights they already have. I have a feeling that the youth in the UK are no more controled or disciplined than ours and the government is having a hard time keeping them inline. I have heard from many juvy officers in the US that our socity is about to take a turn for the worest . They fear the day when their junior high student become adults. The parents relinquished their rights to the states years ago and we are seeing the results. This is just the next step the state has to do to control THEIR kids. They can\’t rely on the parents. And in my oppinion it is the result of a lack of God in their lives. When God doesn\’t define the terms of the criteria and what is a \’good role model\’ the state has to.
It seems you may be over reacting a bit, don’t you think? I mean, let us take note of not only parents in America but in the U.K. as well. Society, on its own, has not produced productivity across the board. It is the genius of the few that allow the multitudes to live. We have created for ourselves a society of monkeys to fill jobs. We care not for education or progress of our citizens, we care merely that they fill some sort of job for the economy. WE care not how they raise their children or what the children are taught. We scream about the unhealthy habits of the masses but we are doing little about it.
Complete liberty is a pipe-dream of the illogical. Just as a musician practices for hours in order to play whatever they want, so to society must give up certain “freedoms” if progress is what we want. It seems that the U.K. is recognizing the limitations of the common man to raise their own children in a responsible way and it feeling the burden of the responsibility to provide these children with the proper accountability and discipline to become productive members of their own society and the world around them.
We bemoan the irresponsibilty that leads to children of violence, who get worked into the ’system’ never to recover. Perhaps if we evaluate the situation that these children are in we may be able to recognize the propriety of legislation that may remove certain freedoms only to liberate other options that these children otherwise would never see.
Quite [sic] Watchman:
I think you need to quit using the catch-all “we” when speaking of your own complacency.
“Complete liberty is a pipe-dream of the illogical.” The founding fathers didn’t think so. And they were much smarter, and far more capable, than you or I.
“Perhaps if we evaluate the situation that these children are in…”. Perhaps if we actually made children grow up and quit treating them like perpetual adolescents who can get whatever they want by being pissy, they would start taking responsibility for their own lives and stop being parasites that live off the effort of others.
“…we may be able to recognize the propriety of legislation that may remove certain freedoms only to liberate other options that these children otherwise would never see.” The rights of individuals can never be taken away by legislation, only unjustly oppressed. Quit justifying tyranny by pointing to the misfortune of a few. No-one has the right to demand that others live for their benefit, regardless of their circumstances.
“I think you need to quit using the catch-all “we” when speaking of your own complacency.” Ok.
“Complete liberty is a pipe-dream of the illogical.” The founding fathers didn’t think so. And they were much smarter, and far more capable, than you or I.”
Really? You don’t even know me. I could be a genius beyond your imagination proclaiming to you oracles that just might enlighten your somewhat patriotic outlook. In order to ensure complete liberty the founding fathers first and foremost made up a list of do’s and don’ts. This further demonstrates my point that in order to have any kind of liberty there must first be what you so dramatically labeled as oppression (but more on that in a moment). In order for any civilization to be established, rights of individuals must be oppressed. All I’m suggesting is that this is taken a little farther for the protection of children from their own parents. We do it with physically abusive parents and sometimes emotionally abusive parents, why not with parents who abuse their children by not raising to have the most opportunity?
“Perhaps if we evaluate the situation that these children are in…”. Perhaps if we actually made children grow up and quit treating them like perpetual adolescents who can get whatever they want by being pissy, they would start taking responsibility for their own lives and stop being parasites that live off the effort of others.
That comment seems a little angry so I’m not going to dignify it with a response.
“…we may be able to recognize the propriety of legislation that may remove certain freedoms only to liberate other options that these children otherwise would never see.” The rights of individuals can never be taken away by legislation, only unjustly oppressed. Quit justifying tyranny by pointing to the misfortune of a few. No-one has the right to demand that others live for their benefit, regardless of their circumstances.
What rights of individuals are you referring to? And who says that the particular rights that you delineate are the ones that you ought to defend? What is tyranny anyway? Perhaps tyranny is the neglect that allows people to destroy not only their own lives but also the lives of their families at the same time. Perhaps the true crime that is being justified is the downgrading of civil virtue for the uplifting of a metaphysical ideal that will not be experienced. Demand is put on our citizens everyday. Demand that I work to make money to be a part of the growing economy. Where is my liberty to not pay taxes? I have the liberty to stifle the abilities and opportunities of my children but if I don’t like taxes I go to jail. One has to do with a vague concept of money and the other with human life. There can be no nation without legislation. I could go on, but perhaps another time.
-QW
“…if I don’t like taxes I go to jail.”
I knew a guy who didn’t pay income tax, and he didn’t go to jail. Berry Briner, hehe…
“…– they are not willing to take responsibility for their own children, so they want the state to raise them. The forfeiture of responsibility is the forfeiture of rights, pure and simple.”
I rather think it is the forfeight of their children… most parents would gladly give up “rights” to protect their children. If these parents allow the state to raise their kids, they are forfeighting their own children to keep their “right” of selfish luxury.
This is really only the attitude of the US on a more blatant scale.
We need to get together, bro! I’m going to hound you this week until we do. ; ) Mooo.
Quite Watchman,
So you have absolutely no problem with the state coming into your home and dictating to you how your children are to be raised and how your home is to be run? Do you really think this is the state’s roll?