Premium

For Britain’s Thought Police the Allison Pearson Fiasco Achieved its Purpose: Turning Up the Fear

For Britain's Thought Police the Allison Pearson fiasco achieved its purpose, says Steven Tucker: increasing people's fear to speak their mind. The investigation was dropped, but the threat still hangs over us all.

14 min read

The current online petition calling for a (very) early General Election to take place here in the United Kingdom has already gained over 2.5 million signatures in under a week. Even though it is less than six months since the previous ballot, so disappointed are some impatient voters with the early conduct of Sir Keir Starmer’s new, dissenter-imprisoning, economy-trashing, farmer-killing Labour Government that they already want the nightmare over.

Were he a U.K. citizen, one eager signature on the list would surely be that of X chief Elon Musk, who on November 24th tweeted out his approving opinion of the petition: “The people of Britain have had enough of a tyrannical police state.” What was it about life in Starmer’s Airstrip One that Musk found so very Orwellian? An earlier social media exchange of Musk’s explains:

The journalist mentioned being visited by the Thought Police of “Soviet Britain” here was of course Daily Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson, who was questioned in her home by uniformed police earlier this month and accused of writing hurty words in an old and since long-forgotten tweet. This cautionary tale has already been covered in depth here on the Daily Sceptic. But now that it is (hopefully) finally all over, a fuller summary of the wider issues the whole debacle raised may be in order.

Self-Appointed Guardians

Following the October 7th attacks on Israel last year, Pearson has spent much of her time campaigning for pro-Jewish

Keep reading –
Donate £5 monthly
(first month £1 for new subscribers)
or £50 annually

Subscribe today to get unlimited online access, as well as our Premium newsletters and podcasts.

  • Read paywalled articles
  • Comment below the line and connect with other users
  • Watch and listen to the longer Premium version of our weekly podcast
  • Listen to every article
  • Receive Premium version of our daily newsletter
DONATE NOW

Comments

This week across the site:

Email me alerts for this discussion
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

18 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Old Brit
Old Brit
1 year ago

The purpose of NCHIs seems to be to discredit the legal system which is based upon one law for everyone. This is individual law

Covid-1984
Covid-1984
1 year ago

No, it’s achieved NOTHING. Roll on the 20th January 2025, when sanity will be returned to the world.

stewart
stewart
1 year ago

All social control is predicated on fear.

No system of authority has enough resources to keep a population under control by sheer force.

Brainwashing helps, but the further from reality the brainwashing is, the more reliant on the threat of force authority becomes.

The problem the UK and most western nations have is the ideology of established power has been diverging from reality for sometime and the population isn’t having it.

Cotfordtags
Cotfordtags
1 year ago

Fascinating this morning to see on GBNews, the corbynista criticising the police for arresting protesters trying to stop the detention of suspected PKK members because they had the cheek to search the community centre and ask the people living in the same house as the suspects to vacate, so the properties could be searched. In his view, these people of faith were all innocent and should not face jail time for the protest because it’s the police who were heavy handed, but he still said that waving the St George cross should be an imprisonable offence when done near a mosque!!!

EppingBlogger
EppingBlogger
1 year ago

The point remains, however, why British police officers would cherrfully stand to be photograohed next to a flag which represents any nation other than ours which I doubt they understood. The article says it was a flag for a Pakistan political party which British police and other officials have no business being associated with.

I have no idea of the policies or charavter of that party but it does not matter.

It is also important to recall just how the police and UK public authorities generally have stood by Hamas and Palestinian demonstrations. At the wholly peaceful protest by naturally peacable farmers the Met rolled out 20 vans of police. When anyone protests for Israel or Jews they better beware. The contrast is binary.

Mogwai
Mogwai
1 year ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

Sam Melia is to be released from prison but the punishment continues;

”UPDATE: Sam Melia will be released before Christmas. However, they’re not allowing him to spend Christmas at home with his family. The state ensured he missed the birth of his baby girl and now they’re denying him her first Christmas. Sam will be placed in accommodation and monitored for 6 months because they claim his stickering makes him high risk of “serious harm”

https://x.com/MrNChance/status/1861905073904980376

An update from his partner, Laura Towler, here. It all sounds completely over the top and disproportionate when you consider who they’ve let out early and who gets suspended sentences;

https://x.com/MrNChance/status/1862038872621760746/photo/1

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

Thanks for these.

That we have an anti-white government and an anti-white Establishment is becoming clearer and clearer to more and more people.

RW
RW
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

In this context “high risk of serious harm” means “He could still have some stickers left and put them somewhere!” That’s the actual issue here: The notion that speech can be harmful in itself, ie, that people may be harmed by being exposed to opinions they really don’t like (or rather, the government really doesn’t like).

huxleypiggles
huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

The evil bastards.

NeilofWatford
NeilofWatford
1 year ago

Not for me it won’t.
I’ll follow my own conscience, post what I want when I want, say what I want to say.
Always have, always will.
There’s more of us than them and they’re terrified of us.

MajorMajor
MajorMajor
1 year ago

Indeed the process is in itself the punishment; doing it to a high-profile journalist ensures that the message will get publicity. The message being “keep quiet or the police will turn up on your doorstep”.
The police visiting you is in itself a punishment. You are only human: you will feel stressed out, intimidated and humiliated just by them knocking on your door. That’s the aim here. That will teach you a lesson. Next time you’ll keep quiet.
The fact that “hate crime incident” is such a vaguely defined term is deliberate too. Its aim is to include anything that the government doesn’t want you to do.
The whole thing is not even particularly original: it is a copy of the 1927 Stalinist “Counter-revolutionary activity” law that allowed people to be sentenced to 10 years in the Gulag for making a joke.

FerdIII
FerdIII
1 year ago

Dystopian and why the Police need a thorough cleansing, as do our ‘laws’.
Pets and minorities can now be offended by something and register a crime against you.
As the author asks – is hating the non-crime of a hate-crime, itself a thought or hate crime?

Massive government and state power. And we are to worship the police as ‘heroes’. They are no such thing, too many of them are useless and most of them are part of the problem.

Grahamb
Grahamb
1 year ago

As ever with a Mr Tucker article, far too many words. He probably didn’t have enough time to write a concise piece so produced this instead.

godknowsimgood
godknowsimgood
1 year ago
Reply to  Grahamb

You should stick to reading posts on Twitter/X. Have you ever read a book?

Grahamb
Grahamb
1 year ago
Reply to  godknowsimgood

Thanks for your advice. I have read a book. To be fair, not recently though.

godknowsimgood
godknowsimgood
1 year ago
Reply to  Grahamb

You said the article has “far too many words”. Not a little too many words but FAR too many words. How many words do you think the article should have? Half as many? Or fewer than that?

RW
RW
1 year ago
Reply to  Grahamb

As opposed to some of the others, I thought this one was really ok.

Grahamb
Grahamb
1 year ago
Reply to  RW

Almost wish I had read it now. I get a few paragraphs in and there is no purpose and then I read on and it’s more periphery stuff and I scroll up to see author and when I see Tucker (and to be fair a couple of others in recent times) and just scroll down to next article. That’s the problem when the editors don’t edit….

Thank you for reading. Please help us keep the Daily Sceptic going by becoming a donor.