If we are going to start discouraging tangents on HN, which would be a drastic change, we're not going to do it selectively for topics you don't want to see discussed.

>If we are going to start discouraging tangents on HN, which would be a drastic change

This is straight from the guidelines

"Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. "

Bringing up immigration policy in regards to a new internet identification legislation seems less like a "discourageable tangent" and more of an "overt breaking of one of the few enforceable rules of the site"

My advice is to read again and try to understand why it hasn't yet been flagged despite being up for hours with now 60 points.

Sure, let me break it down. You attempted to dress up the point about increased survailance (low trust society -> increaed authoritarianism to control low trust society) which is tangentially related to the VPN regulation, in a number of far right buzz words. that gives it enough cover to not count as flamebait or politics, even though it arguably IS both of them and should be removed.

The guy below you, whom I replied to, is nowhere as good at dogwhistles as you and straight up brought up the boat conversation, which has 0 to do with vpns and honestly its just "build a wall" but for the sea, a conversation so boringly transplanted from american media is almost not wroth discussing.

You bragging about how you manged to say the things you shouldn't by talking around it and how many people either fell for it/or agree with you and know the dogwhistles is not something I would be proud of.

Just to be perfectly clear, the far right is surging because the demands of the lower and middle class are ignored, in serving both old money aristocrats, landlords, media moguls and foreign oligarchs all of which are economical leeches. We are in a post Tatcher "there is no society" world, not in some kind of left kumbaya "we are the world" reality. The far right is up because they thrive in dog whistles and anger like you are riling up, good at burning down Reichstags more than building any sort of succesful society.

> increased survailance (low trust society -> increaed authoritarianism to control low trust society)

That might be a factor, but the main things I see is that British society is very sharply divided -- dangerously so maybe -- and that these new online safety rules might be an attempt to reduce the ability of one side of the division to influence the public discourse and to engage in collective action. If so, then immigration policy is relevant to this thread in that it is probably the issue most central or essential to the division.

That's a lot of assumptions in one comment. No one claimed that the far-right is the solution (or at least I didn't) but rather the consequence. HN demographic is not even generally far-right and the agreement comes from the fact that people understood the context of the comment that you just failed to understand.

> That's a lot of assumptions in one comment

thats the advantage of dogwhistling, is that you can always feign ignorance

> No one claimed that the far-right is the solution (or at least I didn't) but rather the consequence.

the consequence of the far right economic model of hyper individualism? So far right breeds more far right, and calling it out is just "making assumptions"?

> HN demographic is not even generally far-right

It is one of the more susceptible groups to fall for their spell though. HN tends to skew nerdy and libertarian, two groups that think of themselves as intelligent which means if you trick them into thinking something they tend to internalise it because they think they came to the conclusion themselves. It is also a highly targetted demographic by far right groups.

Or do you think its a surprise that the "far left hippie" Sillicon Valley reputation got shredded in a second when half of LA was in Trump's inaguration? We had tech bros in front of elected officials. Crypto, videogames all oriignally very HN areas are all now constantly under threat of "manosphere" influencers, all paid by the same 5 think tanks, and far right billioanires.

> he agreement comes from the fact that people understood the context of the comment

Sure, thats not an assumption, that is you being an all knowing entity that can analyse why 60 people upvoted something. I mean it could be one russian farm pushing for "destroy cultural identity" text recognition as they have been known to do on X and Reddit. Or it can be 60 hyper rational individuals all of which understood the context I clearly seem to miss. But your assumption is right of course.

Just to be clear, I am not accusing you of being far right, you are just repeating their talking points and strategies. If you are doing it on purpose and pretending to be unaware that bad. If you simply are unaware I am explicitely explaining how and why they do and say the things you said and did.

Well you clearly have a higher sense of awareness and probably intelligence than a lot of other people in the community. I'm just going to let the Russian farm and the easily tricked continue to engage how they want.

I dont, im a dumbass like everyone else. But im not unaware of the kind of people visit HN or what our achilles heel is. Knowing that far right movements are infiltrating and would like to use me to repeat their viewpoints is something I found worrying and worthy of self reflection.

Your flipant attitude is either lack of self reflection or worse, you are aware of what youre doing and downplaying bad faith dogwhistling.

> badly implemented brexit policy and a negligent tory party rule over 13 years.

How about:

2018 - Sandhurst Treaty

2022 - Interior Ministers’/ Home Secretaries’ joint declaration of November 14th

2023 - UK-France Joint Leaders' Declaration

Yes, these did nothing. Starmer's/Macron's joint declaration will also do nothing. If you don't understand why, try starting with the past 204 years of anglo/French relations.

One of the topics being censored on twitter is footage of what many would call a side effect of migration.